Absurd Trolley Problems
Vložit
- čas přidán 6. 08. 2022
- Catch me Live ► / cliccy
Merch ► teespring.com/stores/the-clic...
Discord ► discordapp.com/invite/tmnb7sr
TikTok ► vm.tiktok.com/ZSJbDmX12/
Patreon ► / theclick
Twitter ► / nottheclick
Instagram ► / themarkdeck
10% off Gamersupps ► gamersupps.gg/?afmc=Click
Edited by ► Epykslion
/ epykslion
#trolleyproblems #theclick #stream - Hry
oh no such disgustang choices imma cancel u on myspace
Not if I cancel him first >:)
bring it bish
OwO what is this
This reminds me of the meme of the two spidermen pointing at each other
I would do nothing unless I'm actively trying to save someone specific. I prefer being passive where I do not cause the death of anyone, while the other choice involves actively murdering someone.
dude is making so much content it's like he has 48 hours in his day
sleep is for mortals
@@cliccy Dude got 2 people in one? Damn
@@rafnael8807 he saved one of his clones to work for him
@@rachelgil8992 oh shiii man
@@rafnael8807 mango is secretly using a deep fake for half of the videos
Click: so we're just gonna do nothing and hit OT
Also Click: *pulls the lever*
OT brings so much psitivity in this world that he probably has saved several people from killing themselves at this point.
@@witherschat OT and Click are best dads
OP! Shh! 🤫👍 Hehe 💙
It was to trick any blind people listening
His name is click
Lobsters are the only animals that are alive when you kill them -Clicky
"I'm not sure, how many peoiple one lobster counts as" - also Clicky
Well, we gonna learn the morality of Cliccy from all the cursed things he’s seen.
102 people killed >:3
Good Place vibes;o)
The game confirmed what we already know, Cliccy is one of the many clones of the Click
The Clicks
Always flick it back and forth so that the death is random.
This is impossible.
Is it possible to have an entity who is more chaotic than the Click or his clones?
or so that you catch the wheels in between the tracks and derailing it, killing every abductee and also the conductor, crew, and passengers
@@t1ff4nyall3n It is possible, little one! Through the power of indecision!! I can never choose on my own, so the chaos of CHANSE is my guide. Hahaha-ack! Hairball.
@@zeldakittin7173 Reading this comment was the first time in my life being called "little one" in an endearing manner WHILST my heart accepts it as endearment. Thank you, chaotic hairball person.
@@QuikVidGuy The perfect outcome
My favourite trolley problem is the quantum trolley:
"A quantum wave-trolley approaches a plate with a double slit. On the other end of each slit is a crystal that will split the quantum wave-trolley into an entangled pair of quantum wave-trolleys with half the original energy of the original. You stand next to a lever that operates seven wave trolley detectors. These detectors are placed on the tracks that the entangled pairs will go through. Right after the detectors, people are tied down to the track, placed inside a box transparent only to the trolley frequency of the EM spectrum. If you activate the detectors you will force the trolleys wave function to collapse into a single trolley particle by revealing which slit it went through. This would instantly kill one of the two people in front of the detectors on one side. But also have a 50% chance of killing a single person on the other end, or a 25% chance of either killing 4, or none, depending on the final direction that the particle-trolley goes through. If you do nothing, you might kill everyone or no one. Or some in some worlds and some in others. But you dont know which it is, because you havnt figured out whether the correct interpretation is Copenhagen, many worlds, pilot wave or any other. There is one last problem; you are a virtue ethicist, and so you are probably unaware of any developments after Aristotle, and you're only vaguely aware that the 20th century happened. Because you might have read Macintyre or anscombe so you have no idea what any of this means or how to approach it."
The funniest thing is that i can actually make sense of the quantum part but have no idea what the ethical part means XD
same, ethic is weird
being unable to comprehend this problem (I can, but the "character" you gave me can't) I decide to do nothing, has to not accidentally break random stuff.
A virtue ethicist. They'll have a bad time, as they are all about living life virtuously... so this problem is hell for them, as all actions or inactions can be both good or bad.
The Consequentialist would way the outcomes against each other and make their decision upon that.
The Deontologist would activate the detectors no matter the outcome, because it's his moral duty to do so.
The Pragmatist would not activate the lever, because it doesn't matter if you do or not, as the events are random.
@@livedandletdie and an idiot would do nothing, because they don't understand (me)
NEEEEERRRRRD
I have an "absurd trolley problem" for you, Clickster:
"Oh no! A trolley is heading toward someone tied to the track! You can pull the lever to divert it to the other track, causing the trolley to run over the legs of five people, leaving them crippled for life instead! What do you do?"
Question, which health care system would be used for the people with the crippled legs?
I would blindfold them in a way that they don't see me. Then I would kill the one person and let the other five believe that I saved their lives, so they won't sue me.
@@TheAlmightyToaster01 Doesn't really matter, you can apply whichever you want, but assume their wounds were properly cared for, for the sake of not adding complications such as 'bleeding out' or 'infections'.
Legs. If it it were hands, I'd hesitate.
Five handicapped lives are still lives. All six people would survive in this situation, and that is better than only five survivors.
13:14
Sorry Click, you done goofed.
If you did nothing, the owners of the trolleys couldn't have done anything about it, but because you voluntarily switched the track they can sue you for destruction of their private property (if it wasn't obvious, I live in the U.S.A.).
The company sees the lost investment, not the investment that could've been lost without your intervention. If they could make sure they effectively lost nothing by suing you for the cost of the stationary trolley and the repairs to the active one (which they will overvalue as much as they can) they will do so without remorse. Even worse, they would almost certainly win the case. They lose nothing (or maybe even profit), and you lose everything.
Thank god he doesn't live in the USA!
Most likely a judge would throw it out if it was as obvious as the question. And the trolly company probably wouldn't want to sue since an accident did occurr which the trolly company probably wouldn't want to bring to much attention to because it would suggest some form of negligence on their part. Why was one of their trolleys unattended but still operating on it's own in a clearly reckless manner.
The only problem there is that for the trolley problem to follow US laws, the trolley company would have to be in the US.
Similar situation would probably happen in the UK. Save 5 people but get a £1000 fine for trespassing to pull the lever. Either way, need those life savings.
Actually, due to Henry Ford and co., this would never happen in the US because of our car based transportation methods
The Prisoner's Trolley Problem Dilemma:
Trolley is about to kill five people. You can pull a lever to divert the trolley to another track, which will only kill one person. However, there is another trolley, on another track, which is also about to kill five people, and a different person also has a lever to divert it onto the same track as yours. If you both pull the lever, then they will crash and all of the passengers on both trolleys will die. What do you do?
Continuously operate the lever and derail the trolley.
How many passengers are we talking here? Because so far i see i can just say 1 in each trolley and risk pulling the lever anyways.
@@themaxterz0169 A fair question. To preserve the integrity of the experiment, let's say fifteen each.
The funny thing is, it's better if exactly one of you pulls the lever, since only 6 people die. If you both pull the lever, 31 people die. If neither of you pulls the lever, 10 people die.
Usually in Prisoner's Dilemma the best case is both do nothing, but I like this variant.
Edit: Should probably actually answer, hahaha.
Assuming I know nothing about the other lever switcher or how likely they are to pull the lever, I must assume 50/50.
If I do nothing, half the time 6 die and half the time 10 die.
If I pull the switch, half the time 6 die and half the time 31 die.
Thus, it's better to do nothing.
@@PowerStar004 So using the same mathematics, what is the greatest number of passengers on the trolley for which you would pull the lever?
For the robot one, I would not pull the lever because the Processing stuff is likely in the head and as they do not need the stuff below to retain sentience. Then we can repair them. They would understand as that would be logical.
Also, as for the "pull lever to sacrifice yourself to save 5 people", knowing me i'd probably panic, think really hard to make the decision, eventually decide to pull the lever... But it would be too late and the 5 would already be dead.
For the robot, I have to disagree; I considered it more like a PS5. The head (controller) is mostly filled with sensors, with the processing and memory storage kept in the body (console). The brain is only in the head for biology, because that's how the body evolved; think of it like a head swimming around with an eye and mouth, later developing appendages and other organs.
Destroying the robots' bodies would destroy their unique minds. Meanwhile, we have a John Doe on the other track who isn't special at all. Kill John, save the Skynets (that way the robots will show you mercy if/when they take over the world).
@@benwagner5089 that's a VERY fair point. Really, it all comes down to where the processing and memory storage is.
My idea was more that with the robot that So long as the "mind" is intact (the only vital component beyond power source) it can be repaired back to their standard Quality of Life, which would be much harder for a human (having their mind and other vitals spread throughout the torso and head, plus the connection between)
But yes, If it would be the complete destruction of the robots, I would choose to save them because for the same reasons you gave, plus it's more life being saved (5 lives saved versus 1 life lost). That's just simple math.
In mine opinion about the robots: When you can make 5 of them then you already have a fair amount of experience in making/repairing them. So I would choose the robots. Also same with the clones, if you can make 5 it wouldn't be that difficult to make another one.
@@proman9849 It takes time and a lot of money to make 5 sentient robots, but it only takes nine months for a group of people to make 5 humans of whatever intelligence.
The bribe offended me when I played it. If the options were in reverse, and he was offering me money to do nothing and let the normie die, I'd pull the lever out of spite
Especially since you can probably get money from him after he dies...
@@witherschat It never said the money was cash.
@@tehesprite502 Indeed, but you can easily make up a story or find a way (especially if he has his credit card and it survived)
The fact that anybody chose to kill a normal person over the cash-pig is disgusting
Oh no ! A trolley is about to run over you. Luckily, a good person is close to the lever and you have 500 000$ in your pocket. They could pull the lever, killing one stranger instead, but only if you gave them 500 000$. If you don't do anything bad, they will most likely choose to let you die.
I saw a video of an adult asking his 4 year old son the "kill one, or kill 5" question, using a wood train set. The kid thought for a moment, picked up the single person, put them on the same track as the 5 people, and proceeded to smash the bus into all of them over and over again.
Trolley problem:
The Click is sick on your trolley and needs a hospital
You can make it to one on time but you'd kill 420 people tied to the tracks
Or
You take the path with no one on the tracks but you'll be a minute to late to save him and you'll get no more content.
Alternate second option: there's only one person on the tracks but it's Ryan George, killing him would be super easy barely an inconvenience.
lmao
Save the Click
@@catboy6451 you'd kill 420 people?
If Ryan George is on the tracks, I would do a backflip, snap the lever operator's neck, and divert the trolley to the other track. Wow wow wow wow wow.... wow....
wow
@@John73John ah doing a backflip, snapping the lever operators neck, and diverting the trolley is TIGHT
12:07 "artificial AI"
smh my head
same energy
The intelligence is extra artificial
That sentient robot one just made me think: If a robot is actually sentient, with it's own mind and emotions, shouldn't it just be called a human? What would make it's life/existence less valuable than a non-robot human's life?
You're thinking of being a person, "human" is just a biological species classification.
YES EXACTLY
I think i would let the trolley hit the robot, not because i value its life less than a human, but because the robot might have a copy of its memory somewhere, and even if there is no such copy, there is still a chance that its memory won't be totally destroyed. If a robot is beheaded, you can still save it. If a human is beheaded, you can be sure he will die.
animals are also sentient
however, are not valued above humans
this is what a sentient robot would fall under for the most part
humans should make the decision to protect their own species as a priority
atleast that's what i think
@@RenderingUser Animals (with a few possible exceptions) aren't sapient, which is what most people mean when they say "sentient"
Your decision to use physics to decide the free will problem mabe me SO happy
12:33
I doubt it is "People are scared of robots" and it is more of a "You can repair the robots" kinda situation tbh.
Roro's Basilisk: You gotta help the AI
I would save the robots, purely because i do not want them to go all (ani)matrix on me
I'm pretty sure it's just human bias. We're biologically hardwired to prioritize the survival of other humans, evaluating other animals as less valuable
You can make more robots
@@georgiykireev9678 Yeah but repairing a human is objectively harder than a machine.
I laughed so hard at the "I don't trust that my Amazon package would be on time in the 1st place"😂🤣
Mainly because I am currently waiting on an Amazon package that's about a week late🤣😂
Well was it coming by trolley?
@@NiennaFan1 I don't know, it never came at all😂🤣
Someone bought me something then went incommunicado on vacation. When she came bwkc, she found out her Amazon account was messed up. They never sent it.
@@Mewse1203 that sucks
18:05 you got two things mixed up there. The uncertainty principle is about not being able to know the exact position and velocity of a particle at the same time. If one of them gets more precise the other gets less precise. The measurement thing is about experiments in quantum mechanics like the double slit experiment. If you measure the particles during the experiment the superposition gets "destroyed" and the outcome changes.
Ok, but could you tell me how is the "predetermined universe" theory called please?
@@crayondevourer2267 hard determinism
@@emdivine thanks
3:55 - It's easy to say 'yes" in theory because, as you said, it's not actually happening.
I remember I was at camp, and we heard a story about a dad who did an ironman triathlon with his quadriplegic son on his back. We were asked if we would do that. I was the only one to say no because, realistically, I couldn't do that. Why would I be able to with someone on my back?
I feel like these "you or many other people" were designed to make people be like "oh no but its ME", but instead people have crippling student debt, will probably never own a house and the earth is dying so everyone is like "oh yeah i can die and people will celebrate me because i saved some dude, frick yeah, win win!"
"we're just gonna kill OT real quick"
he does the understandable choice instead
"You can divert the trolley but it will make your Amazon package late" Always pull it then. It's in their TOS that they would refund you if your package is late.
"Avoiding really creepy situations"
That put the idea of The Click selfcest into my head and I absolutely hate it
O-OH? ?? WHY WOULD YOU PUT THIS OUT INTO THE WORLD TO CORRUPT ANEW
Do you know what really annoys me about this sort of thing?
The idea was always that you were supposed to iterate on the trolley problem. It’s not one question that determines if you’re a good person, it’s a series of similar question as it tries to understand what makes something right.
So this game is actually pretty close to its intended purpose, isn't it? It is a series of similar questions exploring ethics after all.
@@Kath2378 Exactly, click is even discussing several of the things that the original positer of the problem did.
One common one that didn’t come up, one person tied at the tracks or five people Who are there on purpose to mess around despite knowing the danger.
They actually did a similar thing with self-driving cars a few years ago.
It's a very practical issue in this case. Would you prefer the car to kill you (and potentially your family), or a cat/and elderly person/a group of teenagers?
That's a very practical issue for the builders.
@@shytendeakatamanoir9740 Everyone else, I ain't paying for a car, for it to choose to kill me over some loser out on the street. To hell with them. They can stay indoors and go duck themselves.
@@shytendeakatamanoir9740 Would I trust the car to be able to make that decision? ... Well, at least it seems more likely than a person making the same decision, but both seem extremely marginal.
The Click’s worst enemy is the Clack… because that’s the sound of typing on a keyboard or something? “Click clack click clack click”? Idk lol
It's obviously emotional support Karen
2:15 easy, destroy your life savings, become a hero, start a gofundme
YOU'RE A F***ING GENIUS BIG MYTHIC LIZARD
That age one is actually difficult. If it was a choice between 5 people in their 20s or 30s I'd pull the lever, no questions asked. Before people lose their higher brain functions because they see the word "baby" and lose all rational thought read the rest of this. Those people have 20 to 30 years of memories, friends, loved ones and all that, not only will the ones tied up not be able to see those people ever again, won't be able to do all the things they still want to do, or things they already enjoy doing, but all those friends and loved ones will never be able to see them again.
Compare that to the baby, at the age suggested by the image it doesn't have the same level of sentience as a 5 year old, let alone a 20+ year old. It doesn't have _ANY_ memories, it doesn't have friends or loved ones (outside of parents and grandparents) yet, it has nothing. Nothing it dreams of being able to do yet because it can't understand that kind of stuff. *_Of course I'm gonna spare the fucking 20+ year olds, its just logical and makes more sense._* Saving that baby would be like saving a rock with guts, internal organs and all the other stuff inside a human body over saving fully developed people with lives they've lived and more yet to live, happy memories, loved ones, friends, things they like doing and things they still have yet to do. It could be 1 20+ year old vs the baby and I'd still spare the 20+ year old.
However with the elderly, as horrible as it is to think about, its a bit more complicated, providing those elderly are 70+ at _least._ Those elderly don't want to die any more than someone who's 20 or over wants to die, but they've also lived more or less full lives and most likely don't have long left in the world, compared to the baby who, while it won't have *_any_* of the things I've previously mentioned to explain why sparing the 20+ year olds is the more objective and logical thing to do, the baby also has a full life ahead of it, vs the elderly who have more or less already lived a full life. Those elderly deserve to live the rest of their lives happily, just as much as the baby deserves to get a chance at life. I honestly don't know what I would do if it was a choice between those elderly people or the baby.
I honestly would pick the baby. They don't know who, what, when or why, they don't know anyone, they don't know themselves, they wouldn't know what they're missing out on, nor that it's something they'd like.
@@spookshankaman1038 Is this for the one where its the baby vs old people, or the baby vs 20+ year olds?
If its the 20+ year olds that's exactly why I wouldn't pick the baby, because people who have been alive a good amount of years DO have all that and they shouldn't have to lose it all for something that's only been around a short amount of time with none of it whatsoever, especially when they have so many years left to live. I wouldn't even hesitate. (Okay, well, I would a bit, but only because I'd be the one having to do it, not because "bUt BaBy".)
If its the old people, I suppose it makes a bit more sense, but its also still a similar case to the 20+ year olds, just that the old people probably wouldn't have much more time left anyway, which is what makes it so difficult for me to choose.
Edit: If by "would pick the baby" you mean "I'd pick pulling the lever and save the other people instead" and I misunderstood then my bad.
@@TheDaxter11 you didn't misunderstand
Ah yes, child murder is better than killing a random person tied to the track where you can simply stop the trolley and have time to untie the people.
@@kizzy2888 Well the trolly problem isn't designed around having time to stop the think and untie both parties, is it? Its designed around having a difficult choice, and sorry if I'd rather save someone who's already lived a good chunk of their live and still has over 50 years left to live vs what amounts to a lump of flesh that isn't even self aware, but I'm not sorry.
My "worse enemy" would be the abusers in my life, who caused my sister and I so much trauma, but honestly I don't wish them death. I want them to live to (hopefully) eventually learn that they are horrible people. If I were to ever get any revenge and get away with it, I'd shave their hair and dye it neon green, as they were oddly obsessed with having long hair.
If you'll pull the lever to save your "worst enemy" then it seems unlikely you've even been heavily abused or the victim of a very serious crime lol.
No shit.
14:25 we do a little trollying
12:24 you forgot that robots can back up their consciousness in the cloud, so they can all be revived with new bodies. the human can't
I love watching The Click because I come here to be like "haha funny man do things" and then suddenly I'm learning physics
"Henry, move!"
"I can't, Chidi. My boot's stuck in the tracks!"
Click should sell his clones as merch
So that some company can sell off brand Clicks like they did with Mango?
@@thegaytay4327 but think of the content!
that's pretty "absurd" if i say so, click
I just picked the option that does the most kills or has the most personal value to me.
Total:102 dead.
Calculated deaths. Robots and lobsters did not count. With max on everything, you missed 1 death. And there were 6 passengers in the infinity trolley.
Breakdown: (killed) of (max killable)
1: 5 of 5
2: 5 of 5
3: 5 of 5
4: 5 of 5
5: 5 of 5
6: 1 of 1
7: 0 of 0
8: 5 of 5
9: 5 of 5
10: 5 of 5
11: 1 of 1
12: 5 of 5
13: 5 of 5
14: 3 of 3
15: 5 of 5
16: 5 of 5
17: 10 of 10
18: 0 of 1
19: 5 of 5
20: 5 of 5
21: 0 of 0
22: 1 of 1
23: unknown at the time
24: 1 of 1
25: 1 of 1
26: 5 of 5
27: 5 of 5
Total deaths possible: 99 + unknown number from 23
Total deaths achieved: 102
Total deaths missed: 1
Total passengers in problem 23: 4
102 - 98 = 4
Edit: thanks to person who corrected a couple.
2 and 3 were 5 of 5. And 17 is also unknown.
killed 112, idk how
9:14 Don't think we didn't see that you chose to save your friend.
17:36 "Do you actuslly have a choice?"
My answer?
Yes.
Because, even if it has been pre determined what choice I'll make, I still am making a choice.
2:48... You have to remember the people playing this game are going "Life savings, what is that? My life savings is being about $6,000 is debt, I get to save 5 people and wipe out my debt in the same choice? heck yeah"
The very next one, if you are in a position that you can pull the lever you can be off the track as well because those things are not buttery smooth and require some force, no way you are pulling it while being Loony Tunesed to the track.
The thing with sentient robots is that people think oh well they are just human creations. Thing is that they are sentientm with the same reasoning you can kill humans. When it's sentient it's no longer just a machine an object or a toy. And guess what would make a robot mad. Maybe getting run over just like that.
Sentient doesn't equal sapient tho. Yeet the bots if they aren't at least at, say, child level. Humans are supposedly sapient.
@@samiraperi467 my solution: blow up that damn train
1. rebuild them 2. they dont feel pain 3. if they do feel pain WHO TF WOULD MAKE IT SO THEY FEEL PAIN
@@NYChouse People who want them to have the sense of touch. People who would want them to be able to accurately know that they were damaged and where. People who would want the robots to learn what actions are bad for their wellbeing.
Although, that last one seems unlikely, as there are 5 such robots on the track before us, and anyone would know that that is bad. Do you pull the lever?
@@NYChouse ME
10:38
Counterpoint: A baby is easier and faster to replace than an elderly person.
13:25 Running the trolley into the wall would most likely just lead to the trolley company buying another one, which would most likely cause the same emissions but also incur the environmental impact of producing the replacement trolley.
So....destroy the trolley company instead? 😆
I am aware they'd probably just rebuild the company. :/
"A trolley is heading towards your worst enemy." PULL THE LEVER CRONK.
I like how click goes from “stupid bish” to “what the fuck”
We foster kids. The things that some of their parents did to them, I would have no problem with running a trolley over them. Or worse. Not really my enemies, but still. They are these kids enemies.
11:58 the potential of having 5 robots that are sentient is limitless
imagine having linear algebra as your friend
and, the number of people who could just text an ai every day and have their lives improved so much
The very best "Trolley Problem" presentation was on "The Good Place".
"Life savings, what are those? Three sock and half a duck"
Yeah, sounds about right
I am just imaging 5 clone Click channels sacrificing in competition to the almighty algorithm. What carnage.
Seeing your “second run” I suddenly don’t trust the statistics of the answer anymore
11:06 Hey no worries, at least one of them clones has to be an Evil Clone
Super excited to see more gameplay videos from you Click. Been kinda waiting for this for a long time. lol
12:32 I think it more likely means we still value natural life over machines.
11:18
Yes, expected value is the same, but... if you look at it the other way... if you do nothing there is a 50% chance no one dies, and if you pull the lever, there is a 90% chance no one dies... so, I myself wouldn't look at the expected value of average deaths, I would look for a chance that no deaths happen at all. And from that perspective, to pull is clearly the best choice.
I love how he continues after he finishes the trolly problems, in fact one could count it as a trolly problem "rewatch your video and count deaths" or " replay this game skewing the statistics towards a murder-hobo's dream"
okay but at 15:55 that is a villain origin story lmao
Loved the video, but the fact that I could hear that amazing outro again was a pleasant surprise!! 🥰😁♥️ Yay!
It would be interesting if they told you how many people (either actual count or percentage) had made the exact same choices as you did at the end.
Click’s villain arc is a mad scientist
The best way to beat the trolley problem: train drift the trolley, killing all
Being on a circle loop eternally sounds to me to like immortality, that sounds like a plus to me
The start of this video is already an absolute -train wreck-!
trolley* wreck
The safest option from a legal standpoint is doing nothing.
10:37 There was one dude, i think his name was Peter Singer, who argued that lives of elderly people are worth more, because babies don't have that much people attached to them, they have their parents and no friends or stuff yet and also it hasn't been this long so the parents aren't that attached yet, so a baby is just like a potato plant or something, and then it grows and a small kid has already more connections so its already worth as much as a cat or something and so on. Wild thesis.
Whenever click uploads it’s always great
20:06 I'm not sure how many people one lobster counts as.
"Lobsters are the only animals that are alive when you kill them" sounds like something I would say.
The original trolly problem is basically "would you rather have the guilt of not saving 5 people you could have, or the guilt of actively killing one person to save those 5?"
21:30 "Death to every clone"
You're sounding like a separatist
9:51 kill my second cousins. Two birds with one stone.
Glad this came to rec bc I didn't know this man had a gaming channel
when I came across the rich guy vs normie guy level, my personal logic was that "well, one person dies either way, so it would make sense to make the choice where there is something to gain"
I tried to take all of these problems with logic and trying what would be the optimal choice, but I knew and still know that when for some terrible reason a situation similar to the trolley problem happened, I would not be able to think rationally. the pressure of the situation would be too great. I'd never be able to pull the lever. not when there's someone on the other rail
11:01 Well, 5 clones of click that means 5 times more furry content.
16:25 my first thought with "worst enemy" was a guy i hate with my entire being. and that guy is elon musk.
and while i certainly don't condone murder, i'm just saying _no one will ever know_ .
Sure thing, Dan Backslide.
What is wrong with Elon Musk?
I am not saying he is perfect, but I do not think he deserves death.
Really? Of all the warlords, genocidal dictators, and evil billionaires plotting world domination, you chose *ELON MUSK.*
@@zacharyrollick6169 Yeah, I do not get it. Sure, Elon Musk is a little weird, but he is greatly advancing the field of rocketry. How directly involved he is is another question, but he is paying for it, so that is good.
i think people forget that if you do nothing then you aren't charged for murder of four people, instead the person driving the trolley is but the moment you push the lever it's you who made the intentional decision to kill someone you'd be going to jail. you won't just pull the lever and go on with your day.
I used to think that Cliccy was chaotic good, but I think he's just chaotic.
Wtf did I just stumble into?
Perfection.
13:34 It is better to let it continue. Destroying it will cause it to be replaced, which will result in a much higher output of carbon dioxide, a waste of time and materials, and destruction of a useful machine.
I was surprised when I saw how many subs you have. I thought you had more! You deserve more!
Objection, your honor. In a family using the phrase “keep the best genes in the family,” a second cousin is likely also both a sibling and first cousin, so that scenario is basically the same as a stranger.
11:36 If it was tried ten times, no matter which choice was made (as long as it was consistently the same choice), ten persons would die on average.
50% of 10 is 5. 5 x 2 = 10.
10% of 10 is 1. 1 x 10 = 10
I'm really bad at math and this kinda confuses me more.
I mean if the alternative is that the boxes are empty, then aren't we really looking at:
50% chance Box 1 is empty, or
90% chance Box 2 is empty?
@@themisfitowl2595 Yes. The youtuber calculated wrongly. In 90% of the tries the other track will be empty. Thats why so many disagree with his choice. If you pull the lever in 90% of the cases you end up killing no one.
@@themisfitowl2595 On just one attempt, there are three outcomes: 0 deaths, 2 deaths, or 10 deaths. The two deaths are far more likely than the ten deaths. Now, this is where the percentages come in. If we just choose one choice over and over again, the percentage is roughly the amount of times that number of persons will die. If we pick the "50% chance of 2" box, after 10 choices, roughly 50% of 10 times there will be 2 persons in the box. 50% of 10 is 5, 5 x 2 = 10. Now, if we choose the "10% chance of 10" box, after 10 choices, roughly 10% of 10 times there will be 10 persons in the box. 10% of 10 is 1, 1 x 10 = 10.
Basically, if this goes on long enough, a roughly equal number of persons will die either way, but that is only on average. So, the question is, which is more ethical? A higher chance of killing 2, or a proportionately lower chance of killing 10?
@@dannypipewrench533
Since we are only pulling the lever once, I'd still probably go with the 10%, because again, that's a 90% chance the box is empty. (assuming of course that it actually IS empty as that information is not clarified)
Over several attempts, the number of deaths would average out to be the same, but the number of attempts that ended in a death would be different. It would boil down to a 50% chance of killing someone or a 10% chance of killing someone. Even with the chance of a higher number of deaths, I'd still pick the 10%.
Guess I'm a long odds gambler. 😊😊
@@themisfitowl2595 I can understand the reasoning. Getting just one try is the worst thing that can happen in games of chance.
Can someone tell me why CZcams recommended for me furro PewDiePie with deeper voice and Scottish-ish accent?
This 0:10 bit destroyed my mood
Level 21: Plot twist, the lone guy on the other track is the first one you'd reincarnate as so if you'd pulled the lever you'd have broken the cycle.
I don't actually know this, I just imagine it being that way for ironic reasons.
Pulling the level means you're actively choosing to kill one person, as opposed to watching an accident happen to 5.
One problem I have with some of these is that it depends on who the people are. Like, are the four people on the track in the original problem a bunch of right-wing politicians and the one is an innocent civilian?
@@oddballjake229 hit it twice for that multi-track dorifuto murder
When you run over a bad person they never get the chance to redeem themselves. If you run over the good person not only is the bad guy given a second chance, but perhaps you are keeping the good guy from doing something vile in the world someday.
I've subscribed to your main channel and had a bunch of laughs. And I'm glad you played this. HAVE ANOTHER SUB FROM ME!
Favorite quote: "My fAmILy trEe LoOks liKe a LadDer"- click
I played this game before
There should be another choice there, which is to try to untie the people who are nearest to you. Or maybe push a log in front of the train and hopefully it slows down the train at least. (I’m not sure if that would work and even if it would work then you should have quick thinking skills in order to do that)
For the cat and the lobsters part, you could just try to quickly pick them all up, that way neither the cat dies nor the lobsters.
…. Just a thought 💭🤔
That's- not the point of the trolley problem? the whole point is the moral dillema.
@@cat_drone2679 I’m aware of that :)
@@Such.is.life.of.an.adventurer All good then!!
i feel like, in the situation at 9:09 my friend would actively try and convince me to save the other people
The Mona Lisa cost $100,000,000 AND YOU JUST DESTROYED THAT
Önskar dig en bra dag till alla som kan läsa den här kommentaren till resten "L should have learned Swedish"
Ha! Google Translate for the win!!
L should have learned Swedish
I don't like my my ancestors enough to learn their language.
The interesting part about the age one, when the tsunami hit the reactor in Japan, workers who were older, and therefore less likely to live long enough for the radiation exposure to cause long term problems, volunteered to go to the site to protect the younger folks who would likely face those long term problems.
The issue with it being a baby though, is the baby's primary caregiver antivax? Or is the baby going to be raised in the system? Or face racial or gender prejudice? In this day and age it's kind of a crapshoot which option for provide for more years of quality life
whoever made this is amazing
I'll save my worst enemy, but it will be begrudgingly and I will not be happy about it.
Me: *Pulls lever to save them*
Them, stunned: *...Thank you, how can I ever-*
Me: *Ignores them as I untie the ropes, cursing and muttering to myself about how much I don't want to do this.*
Alternatively: *Walks away without untying them*