Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
You are faced with the trolley car problem. A runaway trolley is barreling down the track. You’re a passer-by who has notices this from afar. Ahead of you are five people caught on the track who will surely die if you do nothing. You see a lever to your side. You have option of pulling the lever which will divert a runaway train saving five people’s lives but will switch the car to another track where you see only one person who is caught on the track. Should you pull the lever this person will surely die. You are not aware of the identities of any of these people. Do you pull the lever? why or why not?
Would your argument change in the bridge version of the trolley car problem in which you are forced to push someone over a bridge to stop the car from killing five people instead of just pulling a lever?
Finally, consider the transplant surgeon objectionLinks to an external site.. You are a transplant surgeon and a healthy patient could be used for their organs to save five human lives at the cost of their death. Would you still spend one life to save five? If so, why? If not, why is this situation so different from the first two examples to make it less moral?
Defend your position as either a Utilitarian or deontologist Use a citation from either the reading assignment from Kant or Mill to defend your point. If you knew any details about the identities of these individuals would that change your answer? Your response should be written in paragraph form with in-text MLA citations. Refrain from writing in a numbered, bullet, or outline format. No formal works cited page is needed for this entry. This assignment is worth 10 points and will be graded according to the discussion rubric. No reply is necessary for this particular discussion apart from your initial post.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.