Feels a lot easier to me since in my mind the analogy becomes “do you kill the dude that’s pulling the lever to a track with many thousands on it instead of the track with some money on it so you can see if the next person will change the lever back”
Those are different questions. Ideal outcome vs what’s most likely to happen. Honestly I have no idea, he literally could have been trying to change the system the whole time he worked there and I would have no idea.
What is good is all the amplified discussion about insurance companies and how they kill people. That wouldnt have happened without a catalyst.
I think the ideal outcome is the person changes and stops hurting people. Though in america its pretty unlikely to happen due to greed and ego.
And if that outcome isnt guaranteed, or even likely, is violence that may save many justified?
It’s a real-life trolley problem…
Feels a lot easier to me since in my mind the analogy becomes “do you kill the dude that’s pulling the lever to a track with many thousands on it instead of the track with some money on it so you can see if the next person will change the lever back”
Those are different questions. Ideal outcome vs what’s most likely to happen. Honestly I have no idea, he literally could have been trying to change the system the whole time he worked there and I would have no idea.
What is good is all the amplified discussion about insurance companies and how they kill people. That wouldnt have happened without a catalyst.