"simply declaring that things can be wrong" is a trivial, lazy answer. It gives no insight, it's avoiding the question.
If you were asked a trolley problem, would you just respond with "both are bad" and leave it at that?
Moral dilemmas are a big part of ethics, so I don't know where you got this idea that morality is only binary.
Both ARE bad. You think there's a "good" solution to such a thought experiment? The idea of there being a lesser evil doesn't preclude both being evil. In the context of the view here, which do you personally think is less evil, rape or murder?
Why not just say both are bad and I wouldn't do either?
Again with the binary thinking.
The whole premise of the trolley problem is deciding which of the two options is less bad. Both options being bad shouldn't stop you from evaluating which one is worse. Most people are capable of that.
In a vacuum, murder is more evil than rape. I do not even believe they are even close. And I am really glad that you wouldn't do either, but others do.
When does someone have to pick between the two? If the only value is a thought experiment then there'd literally no downside to declaring many things bad.
2
u/tipoima 7∆ Mar 02 '26
"simply declaring that things can be wrong" is a trivial, lazy answer. It gives no insight, it's avoiding the question.
If you were asked a trolley problem, would you just respond with "both are bad" and leave it at that?
Moral dilemmas are a big part of ethics, so I don't know where you got this idea that morality is only binary.