Hi!

I just watched the TV show Widow's Bay (highly recommended). One episode explored the classic trolley problem and got my mind rolling over its fascinating nuances. I see this problem was already discussed on tildes, but hope a 2026 revisit is worthwhile.

The episode promoted not pulling the lever. It argued that we can't stop all the horrible things that happen in the world. But we can control our own moral status:

"The runaway trolley is life. The lever is me... if I pull that lever it's a choice and I'm choosing to kill that person. I could never do that."

and this lovely message:

"The world is violent and mercurial. It will have its way with you…We live in a perpetually burning building, and what we must save from it all the time is love."

As sweet as that is, I find that interpretation lacking. To me, the physical act of pulling the lever isn't the core moral signal. Not pulling it isn't a get-out-of-responsibility-free card. There's still a violent outcome. That outcome happened because you made the choice to allow it. While you're not responsible for the scenario, you're still responsible for the outcome because it was entirely on you what the result would be.

I think my interpretation matches the "utilitarian" argument, which also hints at "the ends justify the means." I'm not, more generally, willing to get behind "the ends justify the means". But there is important nuance here. Sometimes we must cause harm for greater good and inaction in hard circumstances is its own moral trap. So I'm not sure what I think.

Also enjoyed exploring the variants at https://neal.fun/absurd-trolley-problems/. How would you handle them?

An interesting thought experiment that I vividly remember from undergrad philosophy courses is the trolley problem:

You see a runaway trolley moving toward five tied-up (or otherwise incapacitated) people lying on the main track. You are standing next to a lever that controls a switch. If you pull the lever, the trolley will be redirected onto a side track, and the five people on the main track will be saved. However, there is a single person lying on the side track. You have two options:

1. Do nothing and allow the trolley to kill the five people on the main track.
2. Pull the lever, diverting the trolley onto the side track where it will kill one person.

A variation of the problem that we were also presented with was:

You see a runaway trolley moving toward five tied-up (or otherwise incapacitated) people lying on the main track. You are standing on a bridge that runs across the trolley tracks. There is a large man on the bridge next to you, who if pushed over the bridge and onto the track, would safely stop the trolley, saving the five people but killing the large man. Do you:

1. Push the man over the bridge, saving the five people.
2. Allow the trolley to kill the five people

Which is the more ethical options? Or, more simply: What is the right thing to do?