justice episode1 at harvard 原題：THE MORAL SIDE OF MURDER

This is not truely same as script. This is my translation based on the lecture.

MS:This is a course about justice, and we begin with a story.

Suppose you are the driver of a trolley car, and your trolley car, and your trolley car is hurtling down the track at 60miles an hour, and at the end of the track you notice five workers working on the track. You try to stop but you  cant. Your breaks dont work. You feel desperate because you know that if you crash into these five workers, they will all die. You feel helpless until you notice that there is off to the right, a side track. And at the end of that track, there is one worker working on the track. Your steering wheel works so you can turn the car if you want to, onto side track, killing the one, but sparing the five.

 

Here's our first question.

 

What is the right thing to do?

What would you do?

Let's take a poll.

How many would say that you turn the wheel to a side track?

Raise your hands.

How many say not? would not turn and go straight?

Ok. Most of you would turn. So what would be your reason?

 

Let's start with the majority who would turn. Why would you do that?

OK, stand up.

 

Student Woman1:because its not right to kill five than to kill one. It's not right to kill five when you can only kill one person instead.

 

MS:It would not be right to kill five if you could kill one instead. Ok, thank you.

 

Everybody agree with the reason? Who else?

 

Student Man 1: same situation as 911. The passenger to Washington was the hero because they chose to kill themselves and not kill more people on the ground.

MS: Ok. the principle there was same as 911. Its tragic situation, but its better to kill one so that five can live.

Most of you agree with this? Let's hear from the minority, next. What would be your reason that you go straight?

Man 2: This is same principle as the principle justifies massacre and totalianism. Its purpose is to kill a race so that other race can live.

MS: Ok. So you would go straight to avoid the genocide?

Man2: Yes,presumably.

MS:Ok, that was brave answer, thank you. Let's think about other case. Let's see most of you keep your opinion in this case. Suppose you are a onlooker(傍観者) in this case. You are on the bridge on the train track. You are on the birdge overlooking the train track, and down the track comes a trolley car. There are five workers at the end of track. This time also brakes dont work. The trolley car is about to crash into five workers. You feel desperate until you notice , standing next to you, leaning over the bridge, is a very fat man.

 

If you push him into the track, he would fall into the track. He would die, but you can save five workers. So how many say that you would push him over the bridge? Raise your hand.

How many would not? Most of you voted this way in this case. Here's the question, what about the principle that better to kill one person so that other five can live?

What became of the principle that most of you agreed with in the first case.

I want to hear from somebody who was in the majority in both cases. How do you explain the diffrences?

 

Man 3: In the second case, you need to make active choice. If I did not made the choice, he would never be involved. My choice would make him involved with this case.

MS: but the guy in the first case, he also did not choose to sacrifice his life. did he?

Man3: Yes, but he was on the track.

MS:Second case man was on the bridge! OK, tell me more opinion later. This is harder question. Actually your answer is good. How many can tell the reason why the majority chose the contradictory(矛盾した) view?

Who else can find a way of reconciling(調和させる、一致させる) the reaction of the majority in these two cases? Yes?

 

Student woman(Andrew):In the first case, you need to choose one or five. You have to choode who to die in this case. But in this case, people are going to die because of the trolley car. The car is running and you dont have time to think. But pushing the fat man is an actual act of murder. You can choose about pushing, but you did not choose about the trolley car, runaway train(暴走列車)

MS: OK, who wants to reply?

Student woman2: I dont think so. There are no difference whether you turn the wheel to kill one or you push the person to save the other. Both ways are active choice. Turn the wheel is by your conscious thought, by intention. Pushing the man is also active action by your intention.

 

一回切ります　2012年8月6日　月曜日　お昼