Five versus One and Psychometric Tests

February 18, 2024

Hello,

Imagine you're driving a fast train and suddenly see five people working on the tracks in front of you. You try to stop, but the brakes are broken. You are sure that if they are hit they will die.

Then, you see another track with only one person working on it. You can switch to this track to avoid killing the five people, but this means you would kill the one person instead.

What would you do?

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

Now, think about a different situation. You're not driving the train this time.

You're standing on a bridge above the tracks, watching a train coming. There are five people on the track it's heading towards, and it can't stop. Next to you on the bridge is a very big person. You think about pushing this person off the bridge onto the track. This would stop the train but kill the big person, saving the five people.

Would you push the big person to save the other 5?

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

There is no right or wrong answer. In the first situation, many people would say switch tracks to save five people even though it would hurt one person. But in the second situation, most people feel it's wrong to push someone off a bridge, even if it means saving five others.

What it all means

If someone chooses to switch the tracks in the first scenario, they're leaning towards consequentialism. Consequentialists judge the rightness or wrongness of an action based on the outcomes it produces. In this case, the action of switching tracks is seen as morally right because it results in the greatest good for the greatest number of people—saving five lives at the expense of one.

If it feels that pushing a person off the bridge in the second scenario is wrong, they're aligning more with deontological ethics. Deontologists focus on the inherent morality of actions rather than their consequences. They argue that some actions are morally wrong in themselves, regardless of the outcomes they produce. Pushing someone to their death, even to save five others, violates a moral principle of not directly causing harm to an innocent person.

Until next Sunday,

Alin George

📚 Other newsletters I’m recommending you read

 ⚒️ Resources

Available here. 

I’m putting together a psychometric tests guide.

Would you prefer it delivered as

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

Personally, I tend to better understand concepts if there is a window of time allowed for thinking.

⚖️ This week in Law History — Compiled by Afreen Ali

18th Feb 1503 — Henry Tudor (later Henry VIII) appointed Prince of Wales, heir apparent to the English throne.

19th February 1624 — English "Happy Parliament", the final Parliament of King James I opens at Westminster.

20th February 1938 — Anthony Eden resigned as British foreign secretary after Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain decided to negotiate with Italian Fascist leader Benito Mussolini.

21st February 1804 — British engineer Richard Trevithick demonstrated the first steam engine to run on rails.

22 February 1797 — Over 1,000 — French troops attempted to invade Britain and landed at Fishguard, but were soon captured by the brave ladies of the town. No other foreign force has managed to invade mainland Britain since.

23 February 1863 — On this day in 1868, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 126–47 to impeach President Andrew Johnson, whose lenient Reconstruction policies regarding the South after the Civil War angered Radical Republicans in Congress.

24 February 1803 — In Marbury v. Madison , the U.S. Supreme Court declared an act of Congress unconstitutional, thus establishing the doctrine of judicial review.

📆 Upcoming Law Events — Compiled by Anca Andreea Aurica

To gain access for free to all the AllAboutLaw events mentioned below, sign up for free here.

 Tuesday 20 February

Wednesday 21 February

Thursday 22 February

How was today’s newsletter?

Login or Subscribe to participate in polls.

Reply

or to participate.