Dilemmas
Imagine this. A trolley is hurtling down the tracks toward five workers who can’t escape. Fortunately, you can divert the trolley to a different track with one worker who also cannot escape. Would you sacrifice one to save five?
This is known as the trolley problem, a moral dilemma, a situation where there is absolutely no good answer. One study shows that 90 percent of people are willing to divert the trolley to kill the lone worker, while 10 percent say that they will keep driving.
Now, consider a twisted version. You are on a bridge, with a man with a heavy build next to you. A trolley is heading down the tracks towards the five workers, who are somehow tied up and can not move. You, however, can push the man off the bridge and his body will stop the trolley with the brutal sacrifice of his life. Under such a scenario, which option would you choose?
Not surprisingly, only ten percent of the recorded people say it is okay to push the man off the bridge. These two scenarios are essentially the same, only told in a different way, but why are the answers so contrasting?
To unveil what is underneath, scientists interviewed many people who opposed pushing the man off the bridge but agreed to divert the trolley to the other track with one worker. The scientists found that deliberately causing somebody’s death is contradictory to diverting a train to kill one.
This moral dilemma is extremely intriguing because with the same plot behind the scene, people who agreed to the first, the original version may turn to object to the second one. The trolley problem is just one such dilemma. With self-driving autos booming on the horizon, people are trying to program self-driving vehicles to make sudden decisions especially in the case of an unavoidable accident. Would You favor kids over elders? Would you value car occupants higher over pedestrians? Would you prefer less casualties? It is indeed tough and complex when it is about coding ethics.
P.S. If you are interested in this topic like I am, you may visit the moral machine https://www.moralmachine.net/ designed by MIT researchers for more details.
This is known as the trolley problem, a moral dilemma, a situation where there is absolutely no good answer. One study shows that 90 percent of people are willing to divert the trolley to kill the lone worker, while 10 percent say that they will keep driving.
Now, consider a twisted version. You are on a bridge, with a man with a heavy build next to you. A trolley is heading down the tracks towards the five workers, who are somehow tied up and can not move. You, however, can push the man off the bridge and his body will stop the trolley with the brutal sacrifice of his life. Under such a scenario, which option would you choose?
Not surprisingly, only ten percent of the recorded people say it is okay to push the man off the bridge. These two scenarios are essentially the same, only told in a different way, but why are the answers so contrasting?
To unveil what is underneath, scientists interviewed many people who opposed pushing the man off the bridge but agreed to divert the trolley to the other track with one worker. The scientists found that deliberately causing somebody’s death is contradictory to diverting a train to kill one.
This moral dilemma is extremely intriguing because with the same plot behind the scene, people who agreed to the first, the original version may turn to object to the second one. The trolley problem is just one such dilemma. With self-driving autos booming on the horizon, people are trying to program self-driving vehicles to make sudden decisions especially in the case of an unavoidable accident. Would You favor kids over elders? Would you value car occupants higher over pedestrians? Would you prefer less casualties? It is indeed tough and complex when it is about coding ethics.
P.S. If you are interested in this topic like I am, you may visit the moral machine https://www.moralmachine.net/ designed by MIT researchers for more details.
Comments
Post a Comment