No vote; post was at +2 and that seems appropriate to me.
Trolley problems have four weaknesses: true.
It’s bad that trolley problems have weaknesses: sure, but you didn’t propose an alternative way of forcing people to reason about thorny moral problems. Criticizing trolley problems without proposing an alternative is like criticizing liberal democracy without proposing an alternative—easy, valid, and pointless.
Trolley thinking seeps into politics: highly unlikely; most people-thoughts about politics are had by people who remember nothing from any philosophy class they ever had. To the extent that people assume perfect information, deal in extremes, etc., it’s because of generic human biases, and not because people’s rationality is being hijacked by long exposure to trolley contemplation.
Biases in political thinking are bad: true, but trivial.
It’s bad that trolley problems have weaknesses: sure, but you didn’t propose an alternative way of forcing people to reason about thorny moral problems. Criticizing trolley problems without proposing an alternative is like criticizing liberal democracy without proposing an alternative—easy, valid, and pointless.
Just a snarky opinion. But if you disagree, stop 10 people on any street that isn’t in a college town and politely ask them if they know what a trolley problem is. Bet you 2 or less say “yes.” Alternatively, ask them if they know of a way of pushing people to give an answer to a precise ethical question without dodging the dilemma. Bet you 1 or less can name such a method.
No vote; post was at +2 and that seems appropriate to me.
Trolley problems have four weaknesses: true.
It’s bad that trolley problems have weaknesses: sure, but you didn’t propose an alternative way of forcing people to reason about thorny moral problems. Criticizing trolley problems without proposing an alternative is like criticizing liberal democracy without proposing an alternative—easy, valid, and pointless.
Trolley thinking seeps into politics: highly unlikely; most people-thoughts about politics are had by people who remember nothing from any philosophy class they ever had. To the extent that people assume perfect information, deal in extremes, etc., it’s because of generic human biases, and not because people’s rationality is being hijacked by long exposure to trolley contemplation.
Biases in political thinking are bad: true, but trivial.
With that comment, I have to ask about what you thought about the Less Wrong post about how critic’s do matter, even when they don’t always have alternatives.
You mean you missed it?
Got a citation, or just a snarky opinion?
Most people don’t have philosophy classes.
Just a snarky opinion. But if you disagree, stop 10 people on any street that isn’t in a college town and politely ask them if they know what a trolley problem is. Bet you 2 or less say “yes.” Alternatively, ask them if they know of a way of pushing people to give an answer to a precise ethical question without dodging the dilemma. Bet you 1 or less can name such a method.
I found this comment really useful, thanks!