Up@dawn 2.0

Wednesday, November 7, 2012

Sec19 Grp1: Foot's Hypothetical

(Am I supposed to post before or after class? I feel like logically it should be after, but the current message under "Next" confuses me.) Anyway...

In one of the darkest and somehow simultaneously funniest hypotheticals to date in class (because pushing a fat guy in front of a train is hilarious (yeah, that's sarcasm)), Philippa Foot of England tested human reaction times. We have but a split second to react in the situation with the train and the people who don't see it coming and try to get out of the way themselves for whatever reason, and thinking too long will result in the decision being made for us. The people's identities are unable to be descried, though, so we can't tell if the five are a group of psychopaths and the one is a wealthy, altruistic benefactor or the other way around. And shouting at them to get out of the way wouldn't work because their reaction times would probably not be fast enough.

So, then, must we be the paragon of morality and throw ourselves onto the tracks to save the others? Of course not, but I'd like to meet someone like that. Hypothetically assuming the train isn't literal, that is. According to the Foo Fighters, "There goes my hero/He's ordinary," so there really would be no point in being a superhero for that brief instant unless it significantly slowed down the train to where the others actually got out of the way. Which isn't to say little acts of heroism aren't favored. After all, the only way to change the world is with random acts of kindness.

We didn't really discuss the good Samaritan laws and whether they're a help or hindrance, but that's a tough topic. I'm reminded of the episode of "Seinfeld" where the gang is arrested for laughing at a guy so out of shape he couldn't chase after the one who stole his car. Their sentence was... years? I don't remember. But it's an exaggeration, anyway, and it really is difficult to pick whether or not to help someone in distress, especially if you 100% know you'll be harmed in the process, or like me, you can't swim (I'm such a winner) and rescue that guy waaaaaaaaaay over there drowning. Wonder if there's a term for that kind of situation.

So, yeah, post your questions, everybody.

9 comments:

  1. Edrell(13)9:35 PM CST

    Whether they pulled the switch or not they would still be playing God just by being their. So why not do the greatest good? By her being a British citizen and possibly having family killed with the Germans bombings, I understand why she would see things from that perspective.

    FQ: Did Foot want to sacrifice the "fat man" or the worker?

    DQ: How do you feel about the Law of Double Effect?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Katie Young (sec. 13)10:03 PM CST

    (I can't find my group's post, so I'm posting here)

    F: What is a thought experiment? (An imaginary situation designed to bring out our feelings, or intuitions, on a particular issue)
    D: How do you think Foot would feel about unplugging someone from life support? Is it playing God, or just doing what that person would've wanted?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Jeremy Brooks9:14 PM CST

    I wonder if anyone has asked the question of whether status or position should be taken into consideration when considering who should be sacrificed. It may sound harsh, but maybe that should also be considered.

    Foot
    FQ: What is a 'thought experiment'?
    DQ: What's another example in history that could be applied in the same manner as the thought experiments presented in this chapter and do you think the decision made was the right one?

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think the problem with thought experiments is the fact that we have time to think about them in the first place, but that is just my opinion among many.

    Foot
    FQ:What is the Law of Double Effect?
    DQ: If you change the parameters of the thought experiment, Do you change the meaning, implications, and outcomes?

    Turing
    FQ: What did turing originally design his computers to do during WWII?
    DQ: Do you think that in the future, great thinking computers such as "Deep Thought" from Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy could exist?

    ReplyDelete
  5. FQ: Turing helped to invent what modern piece of machinery?
    DQ: Do you think the Turing Test is still valid today?

    ReplyDelete
  6. De Botton
    FQ: De Botton claims Tate Modern (British art gallery: http://www.tate.org.uk/visit) is "not just a good building but it's almost like a good person, a good, modern, _______ person."

    DQ: Do you believe architecture is a form of art?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jeremy Brooks12:01 PM CST

    Since there hasn't been anything posted for the latest discussion:

    Turing/Bearle
    FQ: What is the process of the Turing Test?
    DQ: Is the human mind really just a computer program? What are the similarities?

    DeBotton
    FQ: According to DeBotton, does architecture have a place in the realm of aesthetics?
    DQ: What buildings have you personally seen that you found particularly "beautiful"? What does it remind you of and how does it relate to your ideals?

    ReplyDelete
  8. FQ: Why was the turning test invented?
    DQ: How could we use the turning test today?

    ReplyDelete
  9. FQ: De Botton describes what building while talking about a person?
    DQ: Would the turning test be helpful today? Why or why not?

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.