When Will a Consequentialist Push You in Front of a Trolley?
As the trolley problem runs its course, consequentialists tend to adopt one of two strategies: (a) silently take comfort in the fact that deontological rivals face their own enduring difficulties, or (b) appeal to cognitive psychology to discredit the deontological intuitions on which the trolley pr...
| Published in: | Australasian Journal of Philosophy Vol. 95; no. 2; pp. 299 - 317 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Taylor & Francis Ltd
Jun2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=121926020&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 121926020 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00048402 BHK jtl: Australasian Journal of Philosophy issn: 00048402 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jun2017 vid: 95 iid: 2 pid: 377 pub: Taylor & Francis Ltd artinfo: ui: 121926020 10.1080/00048402.2016.1212909 ppf: 299 ppct: 18 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 331KB tig: atl: When Will a Consequentialist Push You in Front of a Trolley? aug: au: Woodcock, Scott affil: University of Victoria su: Consequentialism (Ethics) Deontological ethics Cognitive psychology Schadenfreude Moral psychology sug: subj: Consequentialism (Ethics) Deontological ethics Cognitive psychology Schadenfreude Moral psychology keyword: cognitive psychology consequentialism Ethics trolley problem ab: As the trolley problem runs its course, consequentialists tend to adopt one of two strategies: (a) silently take comfort in the fact that deontological rivals face their own enduring difficulties, or (b) appeal to cognitive psychology to discredit the deontological intuitions on which the trolley problem depends. I refer to the first strategy assilent schadenfreudeand the second asdebunking attack. My aim in this paper is to argue that consequentialists ought to reject both strategies and instead opt for what I callrobust advantage. This strategy emphasizes the intricate calculations that consequentialists employ to defend against objections based on friendship and integrity. I argue that these calculations offer consequentialism an explanatory advantage over deontology in the context of the trolley problem. It requires striking a delicate balance between deeply internalized dispositions to avoid causing harm and a context-sensitive ability to prevent disasters; however, empirical data help consequentialism on this front by illustrating that the integration of separate cognitive functions is an ordinary part of human psychology. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Australasian Journal of Philosophy is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Australasian Journal of Philosophy holder: Taylor & Francis Ltd dt: @attributes: year: 2017 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|