Question

The brakes of the train that Casey Jones is driving have just failed. There are five people on the track ahead of the train. There is no way that they can get off the track before the train hits them. The track has a side track leading off to the right, and Casey can hit a button to direct the train onto it. Unfortunately, there is one person stuck on the side track. Casey can turn the train, killing one person, or he can allow the train to continue onwards, killing five people.

What would Kant say to do and why? (Be sure to use his concepts of duty and categorical imperative.)

Answer 1

Kant's hypothesis is a case of a deontological moral hypothesis as per these speculations, the rightness or misleading quality of activities doesn't rely upon their results however on whether they satisfy our obligation. Kant accepted that there was an incomparable rule of profound quality, and he alluded to it as The Categorical Imperative.

Therefore, he would suggest that killing one person is as wrong as killing the five persons. Also, my first impulse is that Kant would state, "No, I can't settle on this choice for each individual has innate worth and to pick one over the other would abuse their entitlement to life." Therefore, in the outrageous, Kant would allow the two individuals to bite the dust.

Be that as it may, I question this, not just for my obliviousness of Kant's actual way of thinking. The distinction between these two inquiries is that you are the individual that must either act or not act. An executioner is the specialist showcasing the underhanded alternative. In this situation, there is no shrewd specialist, just sad conditions. I really want to feel that inaction is an activity simultaneously, in this manner, I reach the resolution:

1) Sacrificing one individual for the other isn't allowed.

2) Inaction is an activity. Consequently, the activity itself, not picking an individual, is ethically abhorrent and repudiates the absolute goal.

The two logical inconsistencies are repulsive. Kant's basic is as yet the most ideal activity to be performed. Be that as it may, we, as unreasonable people, would decide not to maintain Kant's way of thinking.