You’re right. It’s probably going to take more than one.
Tell me, if you’re not up for celebrating murder, what do you call giving a multi-million dollar bonus to a guy who was actively complicit in denying sick people the medical care they need? Not elective surgeries; denying lifesaving treatments ordered by their doctor, the lack of which leads to the death the treatment would prevent? I do hope you can admit than when lifesaving care is denied it is no different than murder. The Hippocratic Oath certainly understands that.
I understand where you’re coming from. I don’t think I could do something like this myself, and I wouldn’t call it “right”. But it is understandable why people are reacting this way and I think you’re squarely in the wrong camp for condemning this; these fuckers broke the social contract and now they are not covered by it. No sympathy.
And there I agree with you. It’s the trolley problem framing that is so infuriating.
As soon as people decide they can move the trolley with a bullet, a whole lot of people are gonna die. And the trolley will continue on unabated, because bullets don’t do that.
I’m not sure you’re right that bullets can’t be a lever, though. Firing the gun is pulling the lever, but nobody ever said it has to be a single lever pull that diverts the trolley.
The point of the trolley problem is that doing nothing results in more deaths to explore the limits of utilitarianism. It starts with the question of whether actively choosing to cause less destruction is worse than doing nothing to stop greater destruction, and you can add context to make it more complex from there.
In the trolley problem, the choice is to kill one to save many by pulling a lever. The lever of regulation has failed, so now the people are going to start pulling levers of their own, to try and reduce deaths. Just because it’s not “the literal trolley problem but in real life” does not mean it’s not the trolley problem.
You do have a point there. What I was predicting was that the targets would quickly become “anyone we don’t like” and then the trolley comes for us all.
That is a valid concern! And it’s the main reason I’m generally against vigilantism, since I’ve grown up. (Also, I edited my comment while you were replying - I didn’t mean to rugpull you, I just realised I wasn’t articulate enough in my point about the trolley problem applying).
But, murder is still murder and this guy is probably going to get caught and put on trial, and punished. I think most people who wouldn’t risk it before this won’t risk it now, and certainly not for petty grievances, but if someone’s situation is dire enough…
Lol, weren’t you just complaining about people misusing the trolley problem…and now you’re worried about the trolley becoming the star of Steven kings Christine?
The trolley problem isn’t a law or anything. It’s literally just a tool for kids to explore questionable ethical dilemmas, and it doesn’t really apply to the real world. Which means it’s perfectly suitable for shit posting memes.
Give it a watch. Hopefully it will give you another way of understanding this event.
The state used bullets (cops with a monopoly on the use of violence to shape societal behavior, elevating the power of the $ over individual voices in politics, etc) to keep the trolly on the tracks. Of course removing a conductor doesn’t stop a trolly in motion. But that’s not what this is about.
If you want to pretend that this event is about a healthcare CEO and healthcare policy you need to check your benefits to see if it includes vision. This is about trying to wake up the majority of wage slaves that earn for scraps by defending the top. And guess what? The general social reaction is showing that many people feel this way.
Takes like yours seem designed to get this event out of public consciousness as fast as possible.
Killing an executive does not change this. It’s asinine to think that it does and celebrate murder.
If you are looking at this as a philosophical victory, you do not know a fucking thing about the ‘trolley problems’. Or philosophy.
I 100% get the anger at insurance companies. This is a fucking stupid take.
You’re right. It’s probably going to take more than one.
Tell me, if you’re not up for celebrating murder, what do you call giving a multi-million dollar bonus to a guy who was actively complicit in denying sick people the medical care they need? Not elective surgeries; denying lifesaving treatments ordered by their doctor, the lack of which leads to the death the treatment would prevent? I do hope you can admit than when lifesaving care is denied it is no different than murder. The Hippocratic Oath certainly understands that.
I understand where you’re coming from. I don’t think I could do something like this myself, and I wouldn’t call it “right”. But it is understandable why people are reacting this way and I think you’re squarely in the wrong camp for condemning this; these fuckers broke the social contract and now they are not covered by it. No sympathy.
And there I agree with you. It’s the trolley problem framing that is so infuriating.
As soon as people decide they can move the trolley with a bullet, a whole lot of people are gonna die. And the trolley will continue on unabated, because bullets don’t do that.
I’m not sure you’re right that bullets can’t be a lever, though. Firing the gun is pulling the lever, but nobody ever said it has to be a single lever pull that diverts the trolley.
The point of the trolley problem is
that doing nothing results in more deathsto explore the limits of utilitarianism. It starts with the question of whether actively choosing to cause less destruction is worse than doing nothing to stop greater destruction, and you can add context to make it more complex from there.In the trolley problem, the choice is to kill one to save many by pulling a lever. The lever of regulation has failed, so now the people are going to start pulling levers of their own, to try and reduce deaths. Just because it’s not “the literal trolley problem but in real life” does not mean it’s not the trolley problem.
You do have a point there. What I was predicting was that the targets would quickly become “anyone we don’t like” and then the trolley comes for us all.
That is a valid concern! And it’s the main reason I’m generally against vigilantism, since I’ve grown up. (Also, I edited my comment while you were replying - I didn’t mean to rugpull you, I just realised I wasn’t articulate enough in my point about the trolley problem applying).
But, murder is still murder and this guy is probably going to get caught and put on trial, and punished. I think most people who wouldn’t risk it before this won’t risk it now, and certainly not for petty grievances, but if someone’s situation is dire enough…
Lol, weren’t you just complaining about people misusing the trolley problem…and now you’re worried about the trolley becoming the star of Steven kings Christine?
The trolley problem isn’t a law or anything. It’s literally just a tool for kids to explore questionable ethical dilemmas, and it doesn’t really apply to the real world. Which means it’s perfectly suitable for shit posting memes.
Democracy @ Work- Labor Unions and Political Power
Give it a watch. Hopefully it will give you another way of understanding this event.
The state used bullets (cops with a monopoly on the use of violence to shape societal behavior, elevating the power of the $ over individual voices in politics, etc) to keep the trolly on the tracks. Of course removing a conductor doesn’t stop a trolly in motion. But that’s not what this is about.
If you want to pretend that this event is about a healthcare CEO and healthcare policy you need to check your benefits to see if it includes vision. This is about trying to wake up the majority of wage slaves that earn for scraps by defending the top. And guess what? The general social reaction is showing that many people feel this way.
Takes like yours seem designed to get this event out of public consciousness as fast as possible.
How them boots taste?