Assignment task:
The Trolley Problem From a Kantian Perspective
You are a strict Kantian adhering to the categorical imperative that one should never treat someone as merely means to an end. When you were confronted with the scenario where you were on the bridge with the fat man and the oncoming train would kill 5 railroad workers on the other side of the bridge, but if you pushed the fat man off the bridge and unto the track, the fat man would be killed but his girth would stop the train and you would have saved five lives. As a strict Kantian, the call was easy. You did not push the fat man off the bridge because doing so would have been to treat him merely as means to an end. i.e., saving five lives. So, the fat man was not treat as a merely a means to an end and five railroad workers were killed by the train. As a strict Kantian you acted ethically. However, you were condemned by society for allowing five people to be killed,
In the other scenario, the train was coming down the track. If it stayed on its present course, the train would kill five railroad workers on the track. However, you at the switch which can change the path of the train to go onto another track where there is one worker and that worker would be killed, but five lives were saved.
How does a strict Kantian approach this scenario? Unlike the fat man scenario, you are not treating anyone as merely a means to an end. You are at the switch. As above, you control the fate of the workers: throw the switch and save five lives and lose one life, or keep the train on its present track and kill five workers while saving one. However, unlike the fat man scenario where you deliberately treat the fat man as merely a means (indeed, one could say that you murdered the fat man), your choice of throwing the switch or not, does not involve treating anyone as merely a means to an end. Or does it? Further, according to Kantian principles, which action should a Kantian take--throw the switch or don't throw the switch?
Your writing assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of how Kant would resolve the issue. This entails explaining Kan't's view the existence of an objective morality, and why we should use reason and banish our emotions as we make our decision.
Your writing assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of how Kant would resolve the issue. This entails explaining Kan't's view on the existence of an objective morality, and why we should use reason and banish our emotions as we make our decision. Looking for Assignment Help?
750 words using writing format