Suppose there are 2 railway tracks running parallel to each other next to a small village. One of the tracks is usually in use and the other one is never used (but can be used if ever needed). A group of small village children usually play on these tracks. Assume all the children know exactly which of the two tracks is usually in use and which one is never used. Suppose on a really foggy day, a group of 10 small children are playing on the track that is usually in-use (knowing that it is in use and may be in danger of an incoming train). Separately, a single small child plays alone on the track that is never in use (knowing that he is safe since the train never takes this track). On that day, a fast-moving train is approaching the area where the group of children are playing. The children are not able to (and will not) realize that a train is coming straight at them due to the fog, etc. You are the station manager and have the ability to switch tracks at the press of a button. By the time you see and realize that the train is on a collision course with the group of children, you have just a moment to decide whether you should let the train follow its usual path and run over the group of 10 children…OR switch tracks and save the 10 children (who always knew that they were in danger if playing on that track) but end up sacrificing the 1 kid who thought he was safe (and was doing the right thing by opting not to play on the other track)? Ethical Dilemma…of a different kind!
I say, kill the 10. They know that they play on the danger track, they know the risk. But of course the village will torch the station manager so please help me God.
hmmm this is a toughie one kid who is right Vs 10 kids that are wrong then again in this situation right or wrong is very subjective and depending on who you talk to after the tragedy you’ll get different answers. at risk of sounding like a nerd, I think we should include other parameters 1.it’s a village, it’s small ( everybody knows everybody) 2.Grief area ( one family vs 10 families) 3.the post-tragedy relations 4.other villager’s feelings Considering the above if we kill the 10 kids, that village will never ever be the same again there will be a village wide grief for a long time to come and it will be called" the great tragedy" for generations. if we kill the one kid who is right then we’ve martyred him and should be a village Hero for generations to come. the good thing about doing the “right thing” is it feels right and you feel it in your gut but is that enough to put an entire village in grief mode for generations to come? so I will say save the village and switch the track. May the one kid who is right rest in peace.
Switch tracks and kill the one kid. This creates moral hazard (much like bailing out risk-taking institutions), and so more lives (encouraged into complacency) will be at greater risk in years to come. So - and this part is crucial - once the ten kids have scrambled away, the body of the “right” child must be dumped on the other, officially active track. That the station manager diverted must be covered up completely, and this post deleted too. The innocent boy will henceforth serve as an example to other children to heed the ways of the village.
hmm… may I ask if CFA1 Buster was asked to setup the questions on Ethics on the exam?..cause all answers seem to be right…
Aravinda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > hmm… may I ask if CFA1 Buster was asked to setup > the questions on Ethics on the exam?..cause all > answers seem to be right… LOL…I wish i did! That would be really cool. Actually this is no ordinary question…it was part of a psychological test that was done a few years back on a random sample of different demographic types to understand how views change with age, city, sex, race, employment, etc etc One of the interesting findings was that 90% of the upper-class (high net worth individuals and families) chose to kill the group of children…while 90% of the below-poverty population chose to kill the one single kid.
oh crap, does it mean that i’m below poverty line?
Switch the track and sacrifice one kid. Just because kids act dumb doesn’t mean they deserve to die. (Would I feel differently if adults were involved instead?) In a hopeless situation like this, all one can do is minimize harm. The moral hazard bit is absolutely true - ensure this is a lesson that the other 10 kids will never forget…
History teacher. I love history, but I like finance and I make more money doing it/ more viable option for a successful career.
^wrong thread
just because the kid is right, it doesn’t necessarily mean he’s any smarter or worth any more than any of the other children. if he was truly smart, he wouldn’t have been playing on tracks. the kid being ‘right’ doesn’t say anything about him. a better question is would you still choose the 1 kid if he was your son?
MattLikesAnalysis Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > just because the kid is right, it doesn’t > necessarily mean he’s any smarter or worth any > more than any of the other children. if he was > truly smart, he wouldn’t have been playing on > tracks. the kid being ‘right’ doesn’t say anything > about him. a better question is would you still > choose the 1 kid if he was your son? Wow Matt…never thought of that one before…now thats a real toughie! If the 1 kid was my son…what would I do!!! I cant even imagine of such a situation…I’d be stressed out - totally! What do the guys who previously suggested to sacrifice the 1 kid think now??? (ie. if it were their own kid).
On the other hand, and to paraphrase Stalin, the death of one child is tragedy, the death of ten a statistic…kill the ten.
sbmarti2 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > History teacher. I love history, but I like > finance and I make more money doing it/ more > viable option for a successful career. soddy1979 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ^wrong thread Wrong thread indeed. Hit the one kid and name the train station after him.