Thesis
The Trolley Problem is one of the acutest and most morally perplexing scenarios in the realm of ethical philosophy. The problem has ignited numerous debates and discussions. It has even been reflected in the modern pop culture of memes due to its being used as a basis for the depiction of various dilemmas. The Trolley Problem concerns the area of moral decision-making and makes individuals face the subtle balance between individual rights and the greater good.
While the Trolley Problem has been approached with various ethical theories and perspectives, the framework of utilitarianism, as advocated by Mill, will be used in this essay. Unlike utilitarianism in general, Mill’s utilitarianism focuses on the quality of pleasure or happiness rather than quantity. From Mill’s utilitarian perspective, the morally sound decision in the Trolley Problem is to purposefully divert the trolley to save a greater number of lives, as this will lead to the happiness of a larger number of people.
Exposition
To understand how Mill’s utilitarianism can guide individuals’ moral reasoning in the context of the Trolley Problem, it is necessary to explain both the problem and the philosophical approach. The Trolley Problem is a well-known thought experiment with numerous variants. Still, the classic one presents a stark moral dilemma: Should one purposefully divert a trolley to save five people while sacrificing one innocent person?
Quality of Pleasure
Before delving into the Trolley Problem, it is essential to understand the underlying principles of Mill’s utilitarianism. In its general form, utilitarianism concentrates on the quantity of pleasure achieved by action with an emphasis on maximizing happiness and minimizing harm. Meanwhile, Mills’ utilitarianism adds a qualitative dimension to the general theory. According to Mill, pleasures can possess different values, so he distinguishes between higher and lower pleasures. The types of pleasures on the higher level include moral, intellectual, and aesthetic ones, whereas lower-level pleasures are concerned with physical or sensual satisfaction of needs. As a result, in Mill’s utilitarianism, higher pleasures are given more consideration and significance when it comes to ethical decision-making.
Utility
Another crucial concept to explain in relation to the Trolley Problem and Mill’s utilitarianism is the utility principle. This approach is the core idea of utilitarianism, which declares that an action is morally right if it promotes the greatest overall good. In Mill’s view, not only the quantity but also the quality of this good matters. Hence, it is crucial to take into consideration both the kind of happiness and suffering involved in a concrete ethical dilemma. In the case of the Trolley Problem, it is necessary to consider not only the number of saved lives but also the level of happiness or suffering one will feel when deliberately causing pain to one individual.
Rights and Justice
Finally, there is also the issue of individual rights and justice that has to be considered. According to Mill’s harm principle, people have the right to be free from interference as long as they do not cause any harm to others. In the Trolley Problem, actively diverting the trolley to deprive one person of life is an infringement of the harm principle, which presupposes a certain degree of injustice and rights violation.
Argumentation
In the analysis of the Trolley Problem from Mill’s utilitarian perspective, the complexity of moral dilemmas is present. There is an intersection between the pursuit of higher pleasures, the protection of individual rights, and the adherence to the principle of utility. In this situation, decision-making should be guided not only by maximizing utility but also by preserving individual rights and considering the quality of happiness gained.
Supporting the Principle of Utility and the Greatest Good
The first argument in favor of resolving the Trolley Problem by diverting the trolley is that this action supports the principle of utility and the greatest good. Furthermore, in Mill’s view, happiness involves not only quantity but also quality of pleasure, with higher pleasures being more critical than lower ones. Therefore, by diverting the trolley and killing one person instead of five, both quality and quantity of happiness and pleasure are gained.
On the one hand, the satisfaction comes in the form of the realization that people’s lives have been saved. On the other hand, realizing that five people have been saved instead of one signifies the quality dimension, where one sees that their action has led to a successful outcome for much more than just one person. The application of the principle of utility and the quantitative utilitarian calculation allows the conclusion that diverting the trolley to save five lives is a greater sum of happiness even though one person is allowed to die as a result. Adding this up to Mill’s principle of quality leads to the conclusion that the greatest overall happiness will be achieved in such a case.
Achieving the Superiority of Higher Pleasures
Another argument in favor of diverting the trolley is that the superiority of higher pleasures, which is defended by Mill’s theory, will be achieved. The moral pleasure of saving five lives will bring about a broader array of positive feelings, promoting the overall quality of happiness. Although deliberately diverting the trolley leads to the death of an innocent person, saving five people is more meaningful. Therefore, saving file individuals is likely to generate more value of happiness and satisfaction than preserving only one life.
The decision to divert the trolley generates more ethical value and thus contributes to the achievement of higher moral pleasures. Furthermore, by actively diverting the trolley, one will eliminate the feelings of regret and passivity that could emerge upon the realization that one has not taken any action in the face of an impending disaster. Although the decision to purposefully divert the trolley is rather difficult, it can relieve the decision-maker of the guilt related to passive reaction.
Fostering Justice and Protecting Individual Rights
Thirdly, as difficult as it is, the decision to divert the trolley still fosters a sense of justice and protects individual rights. The act of diverting the trolley is aimed at minimizing harm to the greatest number of people and, thus, upholding a sense of justice. While the decision may seem unfair in relation to the one individual who is going to die, it is not unjust under Mill’s utilitarianism theory. Actively diverting the trolley is a just decision since it treats every individual’s life equally and does not discriminate against anyone on the basis of subjective factors.
On the contrary, if the trolley is not diverted, it is unjust in relation to the five people because such a decision would favor one individual because the trolley was initially directed toward this person. Mill’s utilitarianism declares that individual rights should be respected, but it also admits that the greater good should be given preference under certain circumstances.