The Eternal Debate: Utilitarianism vs. Deontology

Introduction to the Moral Dilemma

• The speaker introduces the classic moral dilemma of the train, illustrating the conflict between utilitarian and deontological ethics.

• Two tracks are presented: one with five people tied down and another with one person, highlighting a critical choice.

Utilitarian Perspective

• A utilitarian would pull the lever to divert the train, sacrificing one life to save five, valuing outcomes based on overall benefit.

• This approach emphasizes consequences; thus, saving more lives is deemed morally preferable despite the loss of one life.

Deontological Perspective

• In contrast, a deontologist would refrain from pulling the lever, believing that actively causing harm (killing) is inherently wrong regardless of potential benefits.

• The inaction leads to five deaths but avoids personal responsibility for killing someone directly.

Challenges to Utilitarianism

• The speaker presents further dilemmas that challenge utilitarian reasoning, such as pushing a heavy person off a bridge to save five others—an emotionally charged scenario that complicates decision-making.

• Another extreme example involves sacrificing a healthy individual to harvest organs for five terminally ill patients, raising ethical concerns about justifying murder for greater good.

Critique of Deontology

• While some may reject utilitarianism due to its implications, deontology faces challenges too; increasing numbers (e.g., 500 or 5,000 lives) complicate decisions about inaction versus action.

• A new dilemma involving two levers illustrates how inaction could lead to unnecessary death without any moral justification for not acting when it could save at least one life.

Conclusion and Reflection