The following text discusses a philosophical concept.
The trolley problem, introduced by philosopher Philippa Foot in 1967, presents a moral dilemma: a runaway trolley is heading toward five people on the track, but you can divert it to a side track where only one person stands. Most people say diverting is acceptable. However, a variation asks whether you would push a large person off a bridge to stop the trolley and save the five. Here, most people refuse, even though the outcome—one death to save five—is identical. This inconsistency reveals how our moral intuitions are shaped by factors beyond simple outcome calculations.
What main point does the text make about moral decision-making?
People always make rational moral decisions based on outcomes
The trolley problem proves there are no correct moral answers
Our moral intuitions involve factors beyond simple outcome calculations
Philosophers agree that diverting the trolley is always wrong
Correct Answer: C
Choice C is the correct answer. The text shows identical outcomes (one death to save five) but different responses, concluding that "moral intuitions are shaped by factors beyond simple outcome calculations."
- Evidence: Same outcome, different reactions (divert vs. push).
- Reasoning: Something other than outcomes drives moral judgments.
- Conclusion: Moral intuitions involve more than calculating consequences.
Choice A is incorrect because the inconsistency shows irrationality by pure outcome standards. Choice B is incorrect because the text doesn't claim there are no correct answers. Choice D is incorrect because most people approve diverting.