Search results for 'trolley problem' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
See also:
  1. Alessandro Lanteri, Chiara Chelini & Salvatore Rizzello (2008). An Experimental Investigation of Emotions and Reasoning in the Trolley Problem. Journal of Business Ethics 83 (4):789 - 804.
    Elaborating on the notions that humans possess different modalities of decision-making and that these are often influenced by moral considerations, we conducted an experimental investigation of the Trolley Problem. We presented the participants with two standard scenarios (‹lever’ and ‹stranger’) either in the usual or in reversed order. We observe that responses to the lever scenario, which result from (moral) reasoning, are affected by our manipulation; whereas responses to the stranger scenario, triggered by moral emotions, are unaffected. Furthermore, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  2.  44
    Alec Walen & David Wasserman (2012). Agents, Impartiality, and the Priority of Claims Over Duties: Diagnosing Why Thomson Still Gets the Trolley Problem Wrong by Appeal to the “Mechanics of Claims”. [REVIEW] Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (4):545-571.
    Judith Jarvis Thomson recently argued that it is impermissible for a bystander to turn a runaway trolley from five onto one. But she also argues that a trolley driver is required to do just that. We believe that her argument is flawed in three important ways. She fails to give proper weight to (a) an agent¹s claims not to be required to act in ways he does not want to, (b) impartiality in the weighing of competing patient-claims, and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  3.  63
    Stijn Bruers & Johan Braeckman (2014). A Review and Systematization of the Trolley Problem. Philosophia 42 (2):251-269.
    The trolley problem, first described by Foot (1967) and Thomson (The Monist, 59, 204–217, 1976), is one of the most famous and influential thought experiments in deontological ethics. The general story is that a runaway trolley is threatening the lives of five people. Doing nothing will result in the death of those persons, but acting in order to save those persons would unavoidably result in the death of another, sixth person. It appears that, depending on the situation, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4. Ezio Di Nucci (2012). Self-Sacrifice and the Trolley Problem. Philosophical Psychology 26 (5):662-672.
    Judith Jarvis Thomson has recently proposed a new argument for the thesis that killing the one in the Trolley Problem is not permissible. Her argument relies on the introduction of a new scenario, in which the bystander may also sacrifice herself to save the five. Thomson argues that those not willing to sacrifice themselves if they could may not kill the one to save the five. Bryce Huebner and Marc Hauser have recently put Thomson's argument to empirical test (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  5.  16
    Robert Hallborg (1997). Comparing Harms: The Lesser-Evil Defense and the Trolley Problem. Legal Theory 3 (4):291-316.
    “The Trolley Problem” is the name Judith Jarvis Thomson has given to a difficult problem in moral philosophy and legal theory. The problem arises by considering a series of cases, all of which involve a choice of evils. Many, but not all of these cases, involve an out-of-control trolley about to run over a group of five people. In each case we are asked for our intuitive judgment as to whether it would be permissible to (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6.  11
    Whitley R. P. Kaufman (2016). The Doctrine of Double Effect and the Trolley Problem. Journal of Value Inquiry 50 (1):21-31.
    It is widely held by moral philosophers that J.J. Thomson’s “Loop Variant,” a version of the Trolley Problem first presented by her in 1985, decisively refutes the Doctrine of Double Effect as the right explanation of our moral intuitions in the various trolley-type cases.See Bruers and Brackman, “A Review and Systematization of the Trolley Problem,” Philosophia 42:2 : 251–269; T. Scanlon, Moral Dimensions: Permissibility, Meaning, Blame ; Peter Singer, “Ethics and Intuitions,” Journal of Ethics 9:314 (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. F. M. Kamm (2016). The Trolley Problem Mysteries. OUP Usa.
    The Trolley Problem Mysteries considers whether who turns the trolley and/or how it is turned affect the moral permissibility of acting and suggests general proposals for when we may and may not harm some people to help others.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Eric Rakowski (ed.) (2015). The Trolley Problem Mysteries. Oxford University Press Usa.
    A rigorous treatment of a thought experiment that has become notorious within and outside of philosophy - The Trolley Problem - by one of the most influential moral philosophers alive todaySuppose you can stop a trolley from killing five people, but only by turning it onto a side track where it will kill one. May you turn the trolley? What if the only way to rescue the five is to topple a bystander in front of the (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Judith Jarvis Thomson (1976). Killing, Letting Die, and the Trolley Problem. The Monist 59 (2):204-217.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   55 citations  
  10. Michael Otsuka (2008). Double Effect, Triple Effect and the Trolley Problem: Squaring the Circle in Looping Cases. Utilitas 20 (1):92-110.
    In the Trolley Case (Figure 1), as devised by Philippa Foot and modified by Judith Jarvis Thomson, a runaway trolley (i.e. tram) is headed down a main track and will hit and kill five unless you divert it onto a side track, where it will hit and kill one.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  11. Guido Pincione (2007). The Trolley Problem as a Problem for Libertarians. Utilitas 19 (4):407-429.
    Many political libertarians argue, or assume, that negative moral duties (duties not to harm others) prevail over positive moral duties (duties to aid others), and that the legal system ought to reflect such pre-eminence. I call into question this strategy for defending a libertarian order. I start by arguing that a successful account of the well-known case of a runaway trolley that is about to kill five innocents unless a passer-by diverts it onto one innocent, killing him, should point (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12.  25
    Tage S. Rai & Keith J. Holyoak (2010). Moral Principles or Consumer Preferences? Alternative Framings of the Trolley Problem. Cognitive Science 34 (2):311-321.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  13. Michael Gorr (1990). Thomson and the Trolley Problem. Philosophical Studies 59 (1):91 - 100.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14.  56
    Neil Sinhababu (2014). Would You Kill the Fat Man? The Trolley Problem and What Your Answer Tells Us About Right and Wrong, by David Edmonds. [REVIEW] Australasian Journal of Philosophy 92 (4):818-819.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Margery Bedford Naylor (1988). The Moral of the Trolley Problem. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 48 (4):711-722.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  16. Michael Otsuka, Double-Effect, Triple-Effect, and the Trolley Problem.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  88
    Barbara H. Fried (2012). What Does Matter? The Case for Killing the Trolley Problem (Or Letting It Die). Philosophical Quarterly 62 (248):505-529.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18.  81
    Michael J. Costa (1986). The Trolley Problem Revisited. Southern Journal of Philosophy 24 (4):437-449.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19.  36
    Adam Kolber (2009). The Organ Conscription Trolley Problem. American Journal of Bioethics 9 (8):13-14.
  20.  93
    Alec D. Walen & David Wasserman, The Mechanics of Hohfeldian Rights, Featuring a Case Study of Judith Jarvis Thomson on the Trolley Problem.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21.  55
    B. C. Postow (1989). Thomson and the Trolley Problem. Southern Journal of Philosophy 27 (4):529-537.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22.  3
    Shane Epting (forthcoming). A Different Trolley Problem: The Limits of Environmental Justice and the Promise of Complex Moral Assessments for Transportation Infrastructure. Science and Engineering Ethics:1-15.
    Transportation infrastructure tremendously affects the quality of life for urban residents, influences public and mental health, and shapes social relations. Historically, the topic is rich with social and political controversy and the resultant transit systems in the United States cause problems for minority residents and issues for the public. Environmental justice frameworks provide a means to identify and address harms that affect marginalized groups, but environmental justice has limits that cannot account for the mainstream population. To account for this condition, (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23.  1
    F. M. Kamm (2016). The Trolley Problem and Aggression. Social Philosophy and Policy 32 (2):1-17.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24.  46
    C. L. Sheng (1995). A Suggested Solution to the Trolley Problem. Journal of Social Philosophy 26 (1):203-217.
  25.  18
    F. M. Kamm (2013). Trolley Problem. In Hugh LaFollette (ed.), The International Encyclopedia of Ethics. Wiley-Blackwell
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  13
    Andrew Fiala (2014). Pacifism and the Trolley Problem. Acorn 15 (1):33-41.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  4
    Joel P. Dittmer (2014). David Edmonds , Would You Kill the Fat Man? The Trolley Problem and What Your Answer Tells Us About Right and Wrong . Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 34 (6):302-304.
  28. Joshua D. Greene, D. Lindsell, A. C. Clarke, L. E. Nystrom & J. D. Cohen (forthcoming). What Pushes Your Moral Buttons? Modular Myopia and the Trolley Problem. Cognition.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Anna Gotlib (forthcoming). Beyond the Trolley Problem: Narrative Pedagogy in the Philosophy Classroom. In Feminist Pedagogy in Higher Education: Critical Theory and Practice. Wilfrid Laurier University Press
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Alessandro Lanteri, Chiara Chelini & Salvatore Rizzello (2008). An Experimental Investigation of Emotions and Reasoning in the Trolley Problem. Journal of Business Ethics 83 (4):789-804.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Guy Kahane (2013). The Armchair and the Trolley: An Argument for Experimental Ethics. Philosophical Studies 162 (2):421-445.
    Ethical theory often starts with our intuitions about particular cases and tries to uncover the principles that are implicit in them; work on the ‘trolley problem’ is a paradigmatic example of this approach. But ethicists are no longer the only ones chasing trolleys. In recent years, psychologists and neuroscientists have also turned to study our moral intuitions and what underlies them. The relation between these two inquiries, which investigate similar examples and intuitions, and sometimes produce parallel results, is (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  32.  37
    Natalie Gold, Andrew Colman & Briony Pulford (2015). Cultural Differences in Responses to Real-Life and Hypothetical Trolley Problems. Judgment and Decision Making 9 (1):65-76.
    Trolley problems have been used in the development of moral theory and the psychological study of moral judgments and behavior. Most of this research has focused on people from the West, with implicit assumptions that moral intuitions should generalize and that moral psychology is universal. However, cultural differences may be associated with differences in moral judgments and behavior. We operationalized a trolley problem in the laboratory, with economic incentives and real-life consequences, and compared British and Chinese samples (...)
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  33. Philippa Foot (1967). The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect. Oxford Review 5:5-15.
    One of the reasons why most of us feel puzzled about the problem of abortion is that we want, and do not want, to allow to the unborn child the rights that belong to adults and children. When we think of a baby about to be born it seems absurd to think that the next few minutes or even hours could make so radical a difference to its status; yet as we go back in the life of the fetus (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   80 citations  
  34.  26
    Fiona Woollard (2014). The New Problem of Numbers in Morality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (4):631-641.
    Discussion of the “problem of numbers” in morality has focused almost exclusively on the moral significance of numbers in whom-to-rescue cases: when you can save either of two groups of people, but not both, does the number of people in each group matter morally? I suggest that insufficient attention has been paid to the moral significance of numbers in other types of case. According to common-sense morality, numbers make a difference in cases, like the famous Trolley Case, where (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  92
    Natalie Gold, Briony Pulford & Andrew Colman (2013). Your Money Or Your Life: Comparing Judgements In Trolley Problems Involving Economic And Emotional Harms, Injury And Death. Economics and Philosophy 29 (02):213-233.
    There is a long-standing debate in philosophy about whether it is morally permissible to harm one person in order to prevent a greater harm to others and, if not, what is the moral principle underlying the prohibition. Hypothetical moral dilemmas are used in order to probe moral intuitions. Philosophers use them to achieve a reflective equilibrium between intuitions and principles, psychologists to investigate moral decision-making processes. In the dilemmas, the harms that are traded off are almost always deaths. However, the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  36. Henrik Ahlenius & Torbjörn Tännsjö (2012). Chinese and Westerners Respond Differently to the Trolley Dilemmas. Journal of Cognition and Culture 12 (3-4):195-201.
    A set of moral problems known as The Trolley Dilemmas was presented to 3000 randomly selected inhabitants of the USA, Russia and China. It is shown that Chinese are significantly less prone to support utility-maximizing alternatives, as compared to the US and Russian respondents. A number of possible explanations, as well as methodological issues pertaining to the field of surveying moral judgment and moral disagreement, are discussed.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Ezio Di Nucci (forthcoming). Trolleys and Double Effect in Experimental Ethics. In Christoph Luetge, Hannes Rusch & Matthias Uhl (eds.), Experimental Ethics. Palgrave Macmillan
    I analyse the relationship between the Doctrine of Double Effect and the Trolley Problem: the former offers a solution for the latter only on the premise that killing the one in Bystander at the Switch is permissible. Here I offer both empirical and theoretical arguments against the permissibility of killing the one: firstly, I present data from my own empirical studies according to which the intuition that killing the one is permissible is neither widespread nor stable; secondly, I (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  38. Ezio Di Nucci (2014). Ethics Without Intention. Bloomsbury.
    Ethics Without Intention tackles the questions raised by difficult moral dilemmas by providing a critical analysis of double effect and its most common ethical and political applications. The book discusses the philosophical distinction between intended harm and foreseen but unintended harm. This distinction, which, according to the doctrine of double effect, makes a difference to the moral justification of actions, is widely applied to some of the most controversial ethical and political questions of our time: collateral damages in wars and (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  39.  5
    Lawrence Masek (2015). In Defense of a Minimalist, Agent-Based Principle of Double Effect. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 89 (3):521-538.
    Many philosophers assume that the principle of double effect (PDE) is meant to cover trolley cases. In fact, trolley cases come from PDE’s critics, not its defenders. When philosophers stretch PDE to explain intuitions about trolley cases, they define intended effects too broadly. More importantly, trolley cases make poor illustrations of PDE because they focus attention away from the agent and onto the victim. When philosophers lose sight of the agent, some intuitions that fit PDE survive, (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  14
    Natalie Gold, Briony Pulford & Andrew Colman (2014). The Outlandish, the Realistic, and the Real: Contextual Manipulation and Agent Role Effects in Trolley Problems. Frontiers in Psychology: Cognitive Science 5.
    Hypothetical trolley problems are widely used to elicit moral intuitions, which are employed in the development of moral theory and the psychological study of moral judgments. The scenarios used are outlandish, and some philosophers and psychologists have questioned whether the judgments made in such unrealistic and unfamiliar scenarios are a reliable basis for theory-building. We present two experiments that investigate whether differences in moral judgment due to the role of the agent, previously found in a standard trolley scenario, (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  24
    Antti Kauppinen (forthcoming). Sentimentalism, Blameworthiness, and Wrongdoing. In Karsten Stueber & Remy Debes (eds.), Ethical Sentimentalism. Cambridge University Press
    For ambitious metaphysical neo-sentimentalists, all normative facts are grounded in fitting attitudes, where fittingness is understood in naturalistic terms. In this paper, I offer a neo-sentimentalist account of blameworthiness in terms of the reactive attitudes of a morally authoritative subject I label a Nagelian Imp. I also argue that moral impermissibility is indirectly linked to blameworthiness: roughly, an act is morally impermissible if and only if and because it is not *possible* in the circumstances to adopt a plan of performing (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Joshua May (2014). Moral Judgment and Deontology: Empirical Developments. Philosophy Compass 9 (11):745-755.
    A traditional idea is that moral judgment involves more than calculating the consequences of actions; it also requires an assessment of the agent's intentions, the act's nature, and whether the agent uses another person as a means to her ends. I survey experimental developments suggesting that ordinary people often tacitly reason in terms of such deontological rules. It's now unclear whether we should posit a traditional form of the doctrine of double effect. However, further research suggests that a range of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. John T. Sanders (1988). Why the Numbers Should Sometimes Count. Philosophy and Public Affairs 17 (1):3-14.
    John Taurek has argued that, where choices must be made between alternatives that affect different numbers of people, the numbers are not, by themselves, morally relevant. This is because we "must" take "losses-to" the persons into account (and these don't sum), but "must not" consider "losses-of" persons (because we must not treat persons like objects). I argue that the numbers are always ethically relevant, and that they may sometimes be the decisive consideration.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  44. William J. FitzPatrick (2009). Thomson's Turnabout on the Trolley. Analysis 69 (4):636-643.
    The famous ‘trolley problem’ began as a simple variation on an example given in passing by Philippa Foot , involving a runaway trolley that cannot be stopped but can be steered to a path of lesser harm. By switching from the perspective of the driver to that of a bystander, Judith Jarvis Thomson showed how the case raises difficulties for the normative theory Foot meant to be defending, and Thomson compounded the challenge with further variations that created (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  45. Alec D. Walen & David Wasserman, A Reply to Thomson on 'Turning the Trolley'; a Case Study Illustrating the Importance of a Hohfeldian Analysis of the 'Mechanics' of Rights.
    In her latest writing on the trolley problem, 'Turning the Trolley,' Judith Jarvis Thomson defends the following counter-intuitive position: if confronted with a choice of allowing a trolley to hit and kill five innocent people on the track straight ahead, or turning it onto one innocent person on a side-track, a bystander must allow it to hit the five straight ahead. In contrast, Thomson claims, the driver of the trolley has a duty to turn it (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  24
    James Edwin Mahon (2014). Innocent Burdens. Washington and Lee Law Review 71.
    In this article Judith Jarvis Thomson's Good Samaritan Argument in defense of abortion in the case of rape is defended from two objections: the Kill vs. Let Die Objection, and the Intend to Kill vs. Merely Foresee Death Objection. The article concludes that these defenses do not defend Thomson from further objections from Peter Singer and David Oderberg.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  82
    Fiery Cushman & Liane Young (2009). The Psychology of Dilemmas and the Philosophy of Morality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (1):9 - 24.
    We review several instances where cognitive research has identified distinct psychological mechanisms for moral judgment that yield conflicting answers to moral dilemmas. In each of these cases, the conflict between psychological mechanisms is paralleled by prominent philosophical debates between different moral theories. A parsimonious account of this data is that key claims supporting different moral theories ultimately derive from the psychological mechanisms that give rise to moral judgments. If this view is correct, it has some important implications for the practice (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  48.  15
    David R. Mandel & Oshin Vartanian (2008). Taboo or Tragic: Effect of Tradeoff Type on Moral Choice, Conflict, and Confidence. [REVIEW] Mind and Society 7 (2):215-226.
    Historically, cognitivists considered moral choices to be determined by analytic processes. Recent theories, however, have emphasized the role of intuitive processes in determining moral choices. We propose that the engagement of analytic and intuitive processes is contingent on the type of tradeoff being considered. Specifically, when a tradeoff necessarily violates a moral principle no matter what choice is made, as in tragic tradeoffs, its resolution should result in greater moral conflict and less confidence in choice than when the tradeoff offers (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  49.  17
    Liane Young (2009). The Psychology of Dilemmas and the Philosophy of Morality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 12 (1):9 - 24.
    We review several instances where cognitive research has identified distinct psychological mechanisms for moral judgment that yield conflicting answers to moral dilemmas. In each of these cases, the conflict between psychological mechanisms is paralleled by prominent philosophical debates between different moral theories. A parsimonious account of this data is that key claims supporting different moral theories ultimately derive from the psychological mechanisms that give rise to moral judgments. If this view is correct, it has some important implications for the practice (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  7
    Scott Seider (2009). The Trouble with Teaching Ethics on Trolley Cars and Train Tracks. Journal of Moral Education 38 (2):219-236.
    In this study, I investigate the beliefs of privileged adolescents about their obligations to those contending with hunger and poverty as well as the impact of 'trolley problems' upon these adolescents' beliefs. To consider the attitudes of the young adults in this study, I draw upon their student writing from a course on social issues as well as survey and interview data collected at the start and conclusion of this course. I found that, for the privileged adolescents in this (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000