《公正：该如何做是好》：第一课

1、精品文档This is a course about justice and we begin with a story. Suppose you're the driver of a trolley car, and your trolley car is hurtling down the track at 60 miles an hour. And at the end of the track, you notice five workers working on the track. You try to stop but you can't, your brakes

2、 don't work. You feel desperate because you know that if you crash into these five workers, they will all die. Let's assume you know that for sure. And so you feel helpless until you notice that there is, off to the right, a side track and at the end of that track, there is one worker workin

3、g on the track. Your steering wheel works, so you can turn the trolley car, if you want to, onto the side track killing the one but sparing the five. Here's our first question: what's the right thing to do? What would you do? Let's take a poll. How many would turn the trolley car onto th

4、e side track? Raise your hands. How many wouldn't? How many would go straight ahead? Keep your hands up those of you who would go straight ahead. A handful of people would, the vast majority would turn. Let's hear first, now we need to begin to investigate the reasons why you think it's

5、the right thing to do.Let's begin with those in the majority who would turn to go onto the side track. Why would you do it?Whatwouldbeyourreason?Who'swillingto可编辑精品文档volunteerareason?Goahead.Standup. Becauseitcan't be right to kill five people when you can only killone person instead. It

6、 wouldn't be right to kill five ifyoucouldkillonepersoninstead.That'sagoodreason.Whoelse?Doeseverybodyagreewiththatreason?Goahead.WellIwasthinking it'sthesamereason on 9/11 with regard to the people who flew theplaneintothePennsylvaniafieldasheroesbecausethey chose to kill the people on

7、the plane and not killmorepeopleinbigbuildings.Sotheprincipletherewas the same on 9/11.It's atragiccircumstancebutbetter to kill one so that five can live, is that the reasonmost of you had, those of you who would turn? Yes?Let's hear now from those in the minority, those whowouldn't tur

8、n. Yes. Well, I think that's the same type ofmentality that justifies genocide and totalitarianism. Inorder to save one type of race, you wipe out the other.So whatwouldyoudo in this case? Youwould,toavoidthehorrors of genocide,you wouldcrashintothefiveandkillthem?Presumably,yes.Youwould?-Yeah.

9、Okay. Who else? That's a brave answer.Thank you.可编辑精品文档Let'sconsideranothertrolleycarcaseandseewhether those of you in the majority want to adhere tothe principle: "better that one should die so that fiveshouldlive."Thistime you'renotthedriverofthetrolleycar, you'reanonlook

10、er.You'restandingon abridge overlooking a trolley car track. And down thetrack comesa trolleycar, at the end of the trackarefive workers, the brakesdon'twork, the trolley car isabout to careen into the five and kill them. And now,you're not the driver, you really feel helpless until youn

11、otice standing next to you, leaning over the bridge isa veryfat man. Andyou could give him a shove.Hewould fall over the bridge onto the track right in theway of the trolley car. He would die but he would sparethe five. Now, how many would push the fat man overthe bridge? Raise your hand.How many wo

12、uldn't? Most people wouldn't. Here's theobviousquestion.Whatbecameoftheprinciple"better to save five liveseven if it means sacrificing one?" What became of the principlethat almost everyone endorsed in the first case? I need可编辑精品文档to hear from someone who was in the majority in

13、 bothcases. How do you explain the difference between thetwo? Yes. The second one, I guess, involves an activechoice of pushing a person downwhich I guess that person himself would otherwise nothavebeeninvolvedinthesituationatall. And sotochoose onhisbehalf,Iguess, toinvolvehiminsomething that he ot

14、herwise would have escaped is, Iguess, more than what you have in the first case wherethethreeparties,thedriver andthetwosetsofworkers, are already, I guess, in the situation. But theguy working, the one on the track off to the side, hedidn't choose to sacrifice his life any more than the fatman

15、 did, did he? That's true, but he was on the tracksand. This guy was on the bridge.Go ahead, you can come back if you want. All right. It'sa hard question. You did well. You did very well. It's ahard question.Who else can find a way of reconciling the reaction ofthe majority inthese two

16、cases? Yes. Well, I guess inthe first case where you have the one worker and the five, it's a choice between those two and you have to可编辑精品文档make acertainchoiceandpeoplearegoingto diebecause of the trolley car, not necessarily because ofyour direct actions. The trolley car is a runaway thingandy

17、ou'remakingasplitsecondchoice.Whereaspushing the fat man over is an actual act of murder onyour part. You have control over that whereas you maynothavecontroloverthetrolleycar. SoIthinkit's aslightly different situation. All right, who has a reply?That's good. Who has a way? Who wants to

18、 reply? Isthat a way out of this? I don't think that's a very goodreason because you choose to- either way you have tochoosewhodies becauseyou eitherchoosetoturnandkilltheperson,whichisanactofconsciousthoughttoturn,oryou choosetopushthefatmanover which is also an active, conscious action. So

19、 eitherway, you're making a choice. Do you want to reply? I'mnotreallysurethatthat'sthe case. It just still seemskind of different. The act of actually pushing someoneover onto the tracks and killing him, you are actuallykilling him yourself. You're pushing him with your ownhands.You

20、'repushinghimandthat'sdifferentthansteering something that is going to cause可编辑精品文档death into another. You know, it doesn't really soundright saying it now.No,no.It'sgood.It'sgood.What'syourname?Andrew. Andrew. Let me ask you this question, Andrew.Yes. Supposestandingonthebri

21、dgenexttothe fatman,Ididn'thave to push him, supposehewasstanding over a trap door that I could open by turninga steering wheel like that. Would you turn? For somereason, that still just seems more wrong. Right? I mean,maybe if you accidentally like leaned into the steeringwheel or something lik

22、e that. But. Or say that the caris hurtlingtowards aswitchthatwilldropthetrap.ThenIcouldagree with that. That's allright.Fairenough.Itstillseemswrongin awaythatitdoesn'tseem wrong in the first case to turn, you say. And inanotherway,I mean,inthefirst situationyou'reinvolved directly with

23、 the situation. In the second one,you're an onlooker as well. All right. -So you have thechoice of becoming involved or not by pushing the fatman. All right. Let's forget for the moment about thiscase.That's good.Let's imagine a different case.This time可编辑精品文档you're a doctor in a

24、n emergency room and six patientscome to you. They've been ina terribletrolleycarwreck.Fiveofthemsustainmoderateinjuries,oneisseverely injured, you could spend all day caring for theoneseverelyinjuredvictimbutin thattime, thefivewoulddie.Oryoucould lookafterthefive,restorethem to health but duri

25、ng that time, the one severelyinjured person would die. How many would save thefive? Now as the doctor, how many would save the one?Very few people, just a handful of people. Same reason,I assume.One life versus five?Now consider another doctor case. This time, you'rea transplant surgeon and you

26、 have five patients, eachin desperate need of an organ transplant in order tosurvive.Oneneedsaheart,onealung,one akidney,onealiver,andthefiftha pancreas.Andyouhaveno organdonors.Youare abouttoseethemdie.Andthenitoccurstoyou that in the next roomthere's a healthy guy who came in for a check-up. A

27、ndhe'syou like thatand he's taking a nap, you couldgo in very quietly,yank out the five organs, that personwoulddie,butyoucouldsavethefive.Howmany可编辑精品文档would do it?Anyone? How many? Put your hands up ifyou would do it.Anyone in the balcony?Iwould.Youwould?Becareful,don'tlean overtoomuch. How man