MSLD 634 - 1.4.CM: The Train Dilemma

A train is hurtling down the track where five children are standing. You are the switchperson. By throwing the switch, you can put the train on a side track where one child is standing.

Will you throw the switch?

I would not throw the switch. A switchperson attends the switch in a railroad yard, switching trains from one track to another. It is safe to assume that all of the children standing on the track are not tied down and are standing on the track of their own volition. If so, I would have been present to see this occur and would have access to radio to alert the engineer and conductor to stop the train. However, the situation assumes that the children are on the tracks right before my role as a switchperson would come into play. I am going to do my due diligence to yell or use a loudspeaker to alert them of their folly, but my job will not be changed by their actions. If they are in the way of a moving train, the same logic (or lack thereof) they used to stand on the track should be used to sense impending danger and urge them to swiftly relocate. Perhaps the five children are anticipating the train and have strategically placed themselves there. The child on the other track must have chosen to stand on the track where the train is unexpected, knowing he or she would not be impacted by the train coming. I do not believe I should change the fate of such expectation. To allow fate to occur results in not being a murder.

Same scenario except:

You are standing next to an elderly man. If you push him in front of the train it will stop the

train and all the children will be saved.

Will you push him?

I would not push the elderly man. Once again, the man has not placed himself in the line of danger, and it would be criminal to kill him. Once again, to allow fate to occur results in not being a murder. However, the children, no matter immature their decision, have placed themselves in the line of danger. I do not feel any responsibility to save them from their poor decision, particularly if it means risking another life to do so. However, if one would be so inclined to save the children, why not fling themselves into the track?

Same scenario except:

The one child on the side track is your child.

Will you throw the switch to save the five children?

I would not save the five children. It is not about the quantity of life, but the quality. One who would stand on the tracks where an active train occasionally passes is already taking a mighty risk of being electrocuted or hit by the train. 

In reflection of all of the situations, I would perhaps had different answers if those on the tracks were tied down. However, it also depends on what I know or can perceive to know about the persons. Perhaps if the five were tied down, and the lone person was jumping up and down, excited for the coming of the train, I would choose to divert due to the freewill of the one versus the entrapment of the five. However, in a situation where all six were tied down and the five were dressed as neo-Nazis or KKK members, I would spare the life of the lone person without the apparent terrorist affiliation! However, as the stories stand, There are several internal questions that aided in my decision-making.

• Who can say that saving these children once will not result in them returning to the tracks once again? 
• Who is to say they have not already been saved and have not learned their lesson? 
• How many elderly men and lone children must have their existences questioned before this child collective meets their fate?

References

Anderson, Thomas. (n/d). Case Western Reserve University. Accessed at https://erau.instructure.com/courses/32985/files/4883974/download?wrap=1.