tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5728456855323449132.post196889931950775818..comments2023-04-03T14:53:34.469+01:00Comments on Mr Regnier's Religious Studies Blog: Thought Experiment #1: The Runaway Trolley CarMr Regnierhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01111869149091924130noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5728456855323449132.post-29167246706179249992013-06-20T08:09:48.331+01:002013-06-20T08:09:48.331+01:00Thanks for the comment - it's a really interes...Thanks for the comment - it's a really interesting point. I do wonder though, how you draw the conclusion that the bases of our ethical decisions are *species* wide. The survey I refer to in the post was conducted by the BBC, so it's reasonable that the respondents were disproportionately British. As such, it would be hard to say whether respondents are influenced by the cultural and ethical baggage they bring with them or, as you suggest, by something more primal. <br /><br />I haven't seen any data that compares responses to the problem between different cultures, though I'd be very interested if you know of any. It would certainly be fascinating to know whether people in Japan or members of Brazil's Tupi tribe respond in the same way as people in the UK. Mr Regnierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01111869149091924130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5728456855323449132.post-2327067835500570682013-06-19T19:47:32.896+01:002013-06-19T19:47:32.896+01:00The most salient feature of the consistency of the...The most salient feature of the consistency of the trolley car thought experiment results is the implication that the bases of our ethical decisions are species-wide, rather than being inculcated into us. People know what is the right and wrong thing to do in each situation and mainly seem to agree about it, regardless of the seemingly illogical inconsistency between the two experiments. They do this without external guidance because there isn't any. This surely implies that, as a socially evolved species, we don't necessarily depend on such guidance.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5728456855323449132.post-87399987713076434772012-12-20T09:30:25.072+00:002012-12-20T09:30:25.072+00:00Thanks for the comment Stephen.
You’re right tha...Thanks for the comment Stephen. <br /><br />You’re right that one problem with thought experiments is that in practice what a person says they would do may bear no relation to the choice they would actually make in the real world. In any case, it would usually be impossible to prove how far a person’s response to a thought experiment corresponds to what they would actually do, since thought experiments often involve situations that would be impossible, unethical, or illegal to recreate in the real world. <br /><br />If you’d set up something like the Milgram experiment purely as a thought experiment, I’m sure that very few people would respond that they would give a hypothetical volunteer a potentially lethal electrical shock, but in the simulated reality of the Milgram experiment, in practice a high proportion of people did. <br /><br />On the other hand, perhaps the intention of though experiments like the runaway train isn’t to show what we would actually do, but to highlight some of the ethical issues the choice involves.<br /><br />Interestingly, there have been some attempts to run thought experiments in a virtual reality environment to make the dilemma involved more “real”.Mr Regnierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01111869149091924130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5728456855323449132.post-82881419327685169542012-12-20T08:57:12.232+00:002012-12-20T08:57:12.232+00:00I don't know what I would do in such a situati...I don't know what I would do in such a situation, and I doubt anybody does know what they would do in such a situation, until they find themselves in it.Steven Carrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11983601793874190779noreply@blogger.com