What would you do in this situation?

That is an excellent song to end your life to.

Pull it to the right without hesitation.
youtube.com/watch?v=daqdbn2ok5E

Right. A possibility of Komm, Susser Tod is worth it.

But at seven minutes and forty-odd seconds you'd probably still be listening to the music by the time someone notices you standing next to a lever and a pile of dismembered corpses.

And being implicated in a triple musical homicide sounds like a bother.

same answer as always. rip lever from its base, and pop the tires on the train, halting it. then plug my aux into the boombox and play "fuck donald trump" by YG

that's till it plays an anime song that you like :^)

If I can not kill myself I jump in front of the train and see what happens

The song has to be this one: youtube.com/watch?v=r8be8pL0lhw

SHE WAS LOOKING KINDA TRANNY

>deflate train tires
I honestly can't tell if this is a joke or you've never seen a train before

what? the severed lever would be enough to pierce the tires, so I can't really see what your problem is. failing that, you could maybe jam the lever in between the spokes, but that's a bit more delicate.

Can it be one of the 118 OP's and ED's I have saved on my computer?

WITH A FINGER IN HER FANNY

Its only this website where the chance of this man being bizarrely clueless about how trains work is equally probable to him being a snide bitch telling lies for fun

are you quite well?

it is so obviously a ruse, how are you this retarded?

youtube.com/watch?v=SUamHEvVQy0
Can it play this version? Then I would.

My left as seen from the screen?
Or my left as it would be seen by my point of view inside the imaginary picture situation?

This is important, I want to make sure I play All Star.

For those of yoy who do not know, this is actually a product of this moral dillema:

A man is sentenced for death and is sitting in his cell. The man is guilty of an unspeakable crime. You are the executioner. Is it ethical to offer him the means of suicide while he is waiting for execution?

no it's not because if you don't pull the lever it defaults to all-star.

ethics don't exist objectively so no. also it doesn't matter one way or the other

Yes it is, because I want those people dying to know I willfully CHOSE all star and wasn't just panicking too much to act

But it matters for the man, of course. Say you are sentenced for death, but it is unclear whether you are going to get eloctrocuted tommorow or thfree years from now. Would you commit suicide if given the chance to? If so, doesn't such opportunity make the sentence lighter, as seen from he fact that some may choose it over the wait?

okay, fuck you. It's not my fault that you can't approach a simple ethical problem in a practical way.

i thought you meant he's gonna get executed in a minute or kill self in a minute.

As for the question there is no blanket answer that can be given. You go case by case and the 'right' thing doesn't exist so it's just down to how the executioner chooses to use his power based on his probably rather limited knowledge of what's gone on and his nature at the time.

That's really the only correct answer as far as i can see

Can we have a thread of these? I like the format.

...

...

...

cheers fampais

excuse me sir but are you 12?

...

I'd play All Star, because everyone knows that song has the magical ability to summon Shrek to fight for you.

Where's the multi-track drifting?

...

Why would you choose anything other than All Star?

I'd choose the anime as I happen to be a desperate weeaboo myself.

I'm so sorry user

It's okay user, despite my crippling illness, I am able to live a normal, academic life undetected by friends and professors alike.

New paradigm: if you pull the lever, anime will come to life, but everyone on the track will die. If you don't pull the lever, a man with a hammer will break the trolley down, stopping it from killing the innocents, and then proceed to give you a nice slap in the balls with said hammer.

What do you do, faggots?

Anime is only good because it's not real. My balls are not really in use anyway. So the second option.

god damn

Ethics is by far the least interesting and most useless Philosophy branch.

>ethics
>least useful
????

honestly the best and most contemplative of these I've seen

That's right, people will do what they want to do and what they feel is right to do for them. There is no study or school that can prepare them for practical decisions, you have to know by living. That's the best Philosophy can come to in terms of principles and theory of Ethics, no laws or axioms that can be 'applied' here, e.g. Hegel's 'conscience'.

>make the sentence lighter,
You're assuming the purpose of a sentence is to punish rather than to protect/prevent.

>ethics
>useful
I guess if you want to justify arbitrary and unwarranted feelings of guilt and pride, ethics is the way to go; but I really can't think of any uses outside of penance and masturbation.

>what is the criminal justice system
>what are laws
>what is politics
>what is civilization

But Anons, ethics constitute the core of all of philosophy. How I relate to the world makes the world what it is.
>inb4 objectivism

They are a kind of mirror-image, the product of what people do, although they indeed serve as a principle or foundation for actions, this action by itself is the true life-force of all this and if a State's constitution fails to catch to individual perception standards, the laws are going to either fall in violent revolution or peacefully replaced in some other way. There is nothing 'fixed' and immediate in this field.

>ethics constitute the core of all of philosophy
[citation needed]

>[citation needed]
Why do I need a citation? Seems spooky.

Not do anything.

I'd rather die to Smashmouth than to some Japanese cartoon fetish shit

right obviously

dump incoming

haha more like forced meme incoming

...

...

what have you been reading today, Veeky Forums?

...

...

...

...

trial me this: if I have consecutively solved 200 captchas correctly WHY THE HELL WON'T THIS SITE LET ME SLIDE ON ONE EVERY NOW AND AGAIN?

I believe this was Australia's OC from the last thread

If you liked the dump and know much about Kant could you tell me what this kid meant by feels vs reals?

Because we need you to identify more storefronts in third world shitholes.

will this work?
It's in the baneposting thread I hijacked it.

>

why won't this board allow crossposting?

>so much spoonfeeding today for baby user

/pol/'s flagship version

I actually found an appropriate thread and someone else had already posted it.

Still want to know what feels vs reals implies or where I can go to find it.

kek

because you have to actually put the board...

lets hope it works so i dont look like a moron

I have an actual dilemma for you Veeky Forums that's been annoying me.

There is a cop watching you at the switch. He cannot make the decision for you or stop the trolley himself in time as he's too far away. If you pull the switch, no matter who you kill, the cop will arrest you, testify in court and you will be sent to jail for the rest of your life. You don't know any of those people on the rail, so you have no obligation to pull the switch in any direction.

Would you kill one person to save five, knowing that you will forfeit your future and liberties?
Or would you not do anything, letting the trolley go kill whichever side it goes, as you cannot be sure if it will go left or straight.
Or will you simply just purposefully let the five people die, if you are to throw away your future, you might as well go with a bang.

Consequentialism held accountable. Is there an answer?

...

You're just restating the whole point of the exercise. The cop is entirely superfluous.

No jury is going to fucking indict you for saving five people's lives. Any defense attorney who is semi competent would have every one of those five people and their entire families up there crying tears of joy and practically blowing you.

I'm just bringing consequence rather than just having guilt be the lingering factor after pulling the lever. Consequentialism versus deontology usually favors the former if there's no risk from having saved people's lives. So I'm just adding a death sentence to the equation, making you reflect on whether your life is worth more than letting fate decide. If you were to sacrifice your future by killing one person to save five people, would you still do it?

Yet you still killed one person. Should the act of murdering one person not count even if it saved five people?
You're trying to avoid the problem by saying you'd get out of it through a jury. If you pull the lever, the cop, and by extension the entire judicial system, will make sure you go to jail for committing murder. Even if it saved the lives of five people.

That's not how it works. The original exercise implies you accepting the outcome of killing the one person and all it entails, including possible punitive action if you choose to do so. Even then, it isn't so stupidly simple as a cop magically being able to put you away forever. You're adding nothing to the exercise at all.

>You cannot kill yourself
I run in front of the train to celebrate my new found immortality.

I changed the exercise for my own view. My original ethical dilemma was ''would you torture a terrorist to prevent another 9/11 if the government would send you to jail for torturing someone, regardless if the information is accurate, comes from a person of authority?''
Consequentialism with consequence.

You saying ''oh, there isn't a magical cop who puts you away forever'' is like those billion other ''but what if X and Y happened'' to get you out of the trolley problem. Concerning the trolley problem, it always comes down to whether you would save five people or maintain your moral and let five people die. You don't think of the possible punitive actions during the pulling of the lever itself. I'm just asking what if instead of thinking of thinking of weighing if killing one person over five is good, would you do it knowing with certainty that you'll go to jail?

immortality doesn't suppose invulnerability, read bester's 'hell is forever'

the more so a temporary immortality

fellow mathfag detected

I guess I don't understand the point of these exercises. Shouldn't we be killing *MORE* people not fewer?

should of made it a moebius band

how can you tell that he didn't?

I am a fool

This is the hardest one here

Source video on that?