(0:30)The trolley problem不是 Philippa Foot 在1967年提出來的嗎?(當然之前還有一些類似版本) Michael Sandel 只是在其演講中引用而矣! www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/07/what-if-one-of-the-most-popular-experiments-in-psychology-is-worthless/374931/ 這不是哲學常識嗎? 真的很吃驚! (Wiki) The trolley problem: should you pull the lever to divert the runaway trolley onto the side track? The trolley problem is a thought experiment in ethics modeling an ethical dilemma. It is generally considered to represent a classic clash between two schools of moral thought, utilitarianism and deontological ethics. The general form of the problem is this: There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two options: Do nothing and allow the trolley to kill the five people on the main track. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person. Which is the more ethical option? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do? Philippa Foot introduced this modern form of the problem in 1967. (Wiki)
(0:30)The trolley problem不是 Philippa Foot 在1967年提出來的嗎?(當然之前還有一些類似版本)
Michael Sandel 只是在其演講中引用而矣!
www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/07/what-if-one-of-the-most-popular-experiments-in-psychology-is-worthless/374931/
這不是哲學常識嗎? 真的很吃驚!
(Wiki)
The trolley problem: should you pull the lever to divert the runaway trolley onto the side track?
The trolley problem is a thought experiment in ethics modeling an ethical dilemma. It is generally considered to represent a classic clash between two schools of moral thought, utilitarianism and deontological ethics. The general form of the problem is this:
There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up and unable to move. The trolley is headed straight for them. You are standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever. If you pull this lever, the trolley will switch to a different set of tracks. However, you notice that there is one person on the side track. You have two options:
Do nothing and allow the trolley to kill the five people on the main track.
Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.
Which is the more ethical option? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do?
Philippa Foot introduced this modern form of the problem in 1967. (Wiki)
為何香港有二百萬有良知的人於同一天走在一起，這是一個道的表現，這應該令領袖者感到驕傲，但反而令領袖不接受，更把道發酵至現在的境况？
嗰火車司機自己都跳落路軌，咁樣可以點考慮？
當然好人有好報因為有正就有邪因邪不能勝正因現世人類心不正因人為萬物之靈現今人心散亂內在世界身外世界不一每一個人都可身心靈合一就是升華到神正愛内外世界一致果生能量種善因得善果死是因生是果今日因明日果今天做是明天不敗只因前世今生來世就是今天是明天生生不息增生能量正自然能量身心靈合一信奉受行😍😍😍滿天都是神佛
有冇人覺得德立BB好似張智霖? 個外貌，人品當然唔似，德立BB有品好多～
未尝试过好人结果人生谷底，很难有说服力。抱歉不是倒台，是真的感悟
破執觀空 物我兩忘 良知自然呈現 無而能有有而能全 內在化而超越義 理想就在前面 目的王國永遠不遠
Karma is for losers. There are only chaos in this world
根本就不应该干扰火车，无论是撞一个，还是撞五个都与你无关，无善无恶。但无论选择撞那个，都种下了恶果。
種善恩，得惡果。