Killing vs. Letting Die: Trolley Problem Essay examples

1576 Words Jan 22nd, 2013 7 Pages
|
Killing and Letting Die
|
To discuss the trolley problem critically and the relative outside views |

|

The trolley problem; the choice is yours to decide whether or not the lives of five people are saved by the sacrifice of another person. This moral paradox mirrors real-life implications in politics, society and war. In terms of killing and letting die: are we morally obligated to kill in order to save a larger group of people? It may seem that the moral standings of killing and letting die are the same as a life for lives seems completely rational. However, killing and letting die are completely separate identities as they operate on distinct plateaus of the human mind. Ultimately, killing is morally worse than letting die
…show more content…
(BBC UK). This is another situation where a life is given up in order to save five other lives. Most people would say that it is impermissible to kill the healthy person in order to save the five dying patients. For that reason, there is no difference between this problem and the trolley problem since another life is given up to save five others thereby we can conclude killing is a higher moral sin than letting die. In addition, followers of Christianity and Immanuel Kant agree that killing is the darker of the two euthanasia. “Christians should never intend death, for God is sovereign over such matters. On the other hand, Christian physicians and their patients may accept death, bowing to God’s sovereignty, with peace and the joyous hope that good will come out of it”, (Kilner). They do not sponsor the intention of death under any circumstances, but they will let die the ones who are meant to die. In simple context, Immanuel Kant and his deontological ethics share some similarities with the Christian view. In deontological ethics, the result does not establish what is moral. Kant states that the action itself determines the morality, instead of the consequences of the decision. In the case of killing one innocent person to save more people, it is not a morally permissible action because killing is immoral in all cases (First Philosophy). Passive euthanasia is more moral than active euthanasia as shown through the consent assumption where we assume that person is…

Related Documents