Somehow a hard decision rule

244 points · 12 comments · view on lemmy.world

12 Comments

peregrin5@lemm.ee · 23 pts · 1y (2 replies)

The guy who might wander onto tracks doesn't even exist in reality. He's a hypothetical in the mind of the guy with his hands on the lever.

shalafi@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1y (1 reply)

Nah, something like 1% of people who transition regret it. Which is stunningly low considering the enormity of the change. 1% of people are going to regret any major life decision.

RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com · 3 pts · 1y
[ removed ]
Shardikprime@lemmy.world · 19 pts · 1y (5 replies)

Soleos@lemmy.world · 27 pts · 1y (4 replies)

Heh it's a fun "gotcha" kind of modification. Alas, it misunderstands the thought experiment. They're not changing the emotional valence. They are removing a fundamental aspect of a dilemma: harm. One of the purposes of the trolley problem is to provoke the thinker into questioning what they believe about moral responsibility and (in)action.

Doxin@pawb.social · 1 pts · 1y (3 replies)

It's changing the problem from definite harm and potential upside to definite upside and potential harm.

It makes sense people value potential harm different from potential upside.

Soleos@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1y (2 replies)

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand. What is the potential harm in the comic?

Doxin@pawb.social · 2 pts · 1y (1 reply)

The potential harm in the comic is lack of buff dudes, the potential upside in the classic is more good people being alive.

Soleos@lemmy.world · 1 pts · 1y

That does not make sense. What does "harm" mean to you? Less good is not "potential harm". To put it another way, let's assume you and I are completely independent and I have to moral responsibility to give you money. If I chose to not give you any money, you would not be harmed. If I gifted you $100, you would not be harmed. If I gifted you $20 you would not be harmed because I did not gift you $100.

TokenEffort@sh.itjust.works · 18 pts · 1y

Doesn't really work since having to detransition or whatever isn't as comparable to being unable to transition at all but yeah I get it just eradicate transphobia

Okay so I just realized the point went way over my head yeah, the fact it's not comparable is the point, yeah very 🤓 comment earlier 🤦

The hypothetical guy wandering the track is a scapegoat to excuse withholding rights from trans people as a whole. Anyone stating this guy exists and to prevent this from happening does not care about that hypothetical guy, they only want trans people to die.

sxan@midwest.social · 16 pts · 1y (2 replies)

Insufficient information. Is the random guy trans, or a minority, or a woman? Or a CIS white male?

97xBang@feddit.online · 5 pts · 1y

He's a bad.

RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com · 4 pts · 1y
[ removed ]
Broadfern@lemmy.world · 10 pts · 1y

It’s almost as if proper access to healthcare and allowing each person to make their own medical decisions with a qualified provider prevents all of this issue. Detransition is also none of the fucking government’s business! (ᐛ)