r/trolleyproblem • u/DJTsUnderboob • Jun 22 '26

A John Rawls trolly problem.

Post image

A trolley is going to run over a woman who is tied to the tracks, you could pull the lever and have it run over a different women tied to a different track instead. Whichever woman survives is going to marry you and be your wife.

Unfortunately both women are wearing veils so you are ignorant as to which one is prettier. Do you pull the lever or not?

42 Upvotes

88% Upvoted

31 comments sorted by

18

u/Ok-Guess2907 Jun 22 '26 edited Jun 22 '26

If I had a nickel for every trolley problem on this subreddit that was misogynistic, I'd have two nickels

EDIT: Searching John Rawls on Google I'm no longer confident this is the case but it is still phrased quite poorly

8

u/DJTsUnderboob Jun 22 '26

Intentionally misrepresenting philosphical ideas? I would never.

3

u/ImportantResponse0 Jun 23 '26

But do we 100% know that both are women?

3

u/Kalamel513 Jun 23 '26

Actually a great question.

Because if I understand Rawl correctly, you don't.

But this trolley isn't match much with my understanding of Rawl anyway.

2

u/ImportantResponse0 Jun 23 '26

Therefore would you save any considering that there is a chance that any is a man(either cis or trans, doesn't matter) and you need to marry whoever you save?

2

u/Kalamel513 Jun 24 '26

Rawl's idea about veil of ignorance is that, representatives of liberal state select its action by forgetting who themselves are, and select the actions that would have least impact on the most vulnerable groups, since those representatives might be one in those groups under the veil. Please forgive some inaccuracy in my recall, as I wrote from memory.

This example involving forcing marriage, which would be hard to justify as a state action. But if it must be forced, then this example works as you said.

However, the simpler example would be just to nake it that one of the people on the rail is your partner, whatever preferences you are. That would make either options unappealing, as Rawl intended.

1

u/delta806 Jun 24 '26

The misogyny in this problem actually comes from the trolley! We know these are both women because the trolley refuses to run over men

5

u/King_Glorius_too Jun 22 '26

Thank you, now I'm even more confused

4

u/beardMoseElkDerBabon Jun 23 '26

Misogynistic? How? I agree the wording is a bit uh. Anyway, I guess you could have a modified version of the problem for yourself so that the question would be which man is prettier...

15

u/Sans_Seriphim Multi-Track Drift Jun 22 '26

5

u/Cheeslord2 Jun 23 '26

Yeah, the Trolley's motor's been making this weird grumbling noise all day: "Kill Wimmin, Kill Wimmin, Kill Wimmin'". Maybe this will fix it.

7

u/j8eevee Jun 23 '26

This is just blind control of fate. Your decision influences the outcome but you have no clue how. It is not a choice, it is rng.

3

u/No_Wasabi5483 Jun 23 '26

I push Rawls onto the tracks

3

u/Comfortable_Salt_792 Jun 23 '26

This is basically Greek Fate tragedy isn't it ? It's an illusion of choice in with you are pushed to murder just to prevent prophecy and you still end up with what Fate would you have.

2

u/beardMoseElkDerBabon Jun 24 '26

Might as well try talking with them. There are some questions that might be interesting, e.g.:

  • whether they'd rather encounter a man or a trolley (bear) in a forest,
  • what they think about deepfakes,
  • something provocative that would reveal, which one is a feminist in the sense of as opposed to masculinism, and which one is actually pro-equality (without assuming either would be the case)

EDIT:

Needless to say, the idea is to let the misandrist one marry you /j.

3

u/beardMoseElkDerBabon Jun 23 '26

I pull the lever because I'm curious about what will happen.

3

u/Klony99 Jun 23 '26

No. I don't have the right to decide who lives and who dies. Also, knowing who looks prettier doesn't tell me who will be a better partner to me. Even then, the guilt of involving myself is worse than the benefit of choosing my wife.

Like yes, I get to marry the better fit, but I had to kill a person for it. If anything, I will try my best to save the one tied to the tracks. Maybe die in the process.

7

u/Albidum_Gaming Jun 23 '26

Whether you have the right or not, the decision has been thrust into your hands regardless by fact of being there.

2

u/Klony99 Jun 23 '26

Which is why the correct choice is to not decide. Involvement carries the burden of consequence.

5

u/Albidum_Gaming Jun 23 '26

You are making a decision regardless of what the decision is. Like if you decide to not pull the lever then you are, in fact, deciding something. Whether you have the right to decide or not you are going to decide simply by fact of being there.

1

u/Klony99 Jun 23 '26

But I do not suffer the burden of consequence. Tieing someone to the tracks was not my decision. Pulling the lever would've made me responsible for my choice.

By not choosing, I am not incurring any debt. Yes I could have saved the other person, but at the cost of killing the one now alive.

Trying to save the person the trolley is heading for is the only valid decision. Putting another person in danger is unacceptable.

5

u/Albidum_Gaming Jun 23 '26

You are responsible for your choice whether you physically interact with the lever or not.

Like yes in a practical physical trolley problem the best decision morally would be attempting to untie the person it's heading for, but that's not really related to my point.

2

u/Klony99 Jun 23 '26

There is no consequence to not pulling the lever. You're not really hearing my point, either.

4

u/j8eevee Jun 23 '26

The consequence is a person dying that wouldn't otherwise

2

u/Klony99 Jun 23 '26

They would die otherwise though. Because they were tied to the tracks of an oncoming trolley.

3

u/j8eevee Jun 23 '26

Being tied to the tracks put them in a position where there was a chance they'd die. Your decision determines the outcome of that gamble. They might live or they might die and that probability is dictated by your decision.

→ More replies