Was Kant an analytic philosopher? I can’t remember, but thinking in terms of your actions as being the standard for a “categorical imperative” followed by yourself in all situations as well as by all moral beings, the effect of giving the mugger the money is more than $5. If you give him the money once he’ll be able to keep on demanding it from you as well as from other rationalists. Hence the effect will be not $5 but all of your (plural) money, a harm which might be in a significant enough ratio to the deaths of all those people to warrant not giving him the money.
I think we have assume that, although this sounds awfully like that quote about “a million deaths are a statistic”, the cost of additional deaths decreases. I’m not really sure how to justify that though.
This article makes some interesting points about the meaning of intelligence. Curious what you think of Hofstadter’s arguments.