Hello there, I hope you are having a wonderful day! Today, I have a second hypothetical situation for all of you!
This hypothetical is a re-imagining of a hypothetical moral dilemma that has intrigued many philosophers . It involves pragmatism, and moral reasoning. Does a wrong make a right? Do actions change depending on situations, or should actions stay consistent? Here is the hypothetical:
You are in your car, stopped at an intersection. You see a family of 5 walking across the street on your right, walking away from you. As this is happening, you notice a guy driving a vehicle, who has fallen asleep at the wheel. The vehicle is moving speedily at the family of 5 walking across the street, and would put all 5 people in fatal danger. You could drive forward, and crash into the moving vehicle, which would kill the driver. However, you would save the 5 lives. What would you do?
Simply, your two options are, as follows:
Take action and murder a person (who, unknowingly, is about to crash into 5 people).
Do not take action (and don’t murder), but observe the death of 5 people.
This is assuming that the deaths are in inevitable, and are going to happen no matter what. There is no other option available, accept the two above. Which would you choose? Put your intriguing answers, analysis, and/or remarks in the comment section below. I would be interested in what your thoughts on a moral dilemma that has been mulled over for years.
Warning: Everything in this article is for entertainment purposes only. Hypothetical questions are not meant to be taken literally, and should be used as a mental exercise. Reader discretion is advised.
Photo Header: Here!