![Batman vs The Trolley Problem [Existential Comics]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/66f90459-3a6d-4107-a9be-4acc3ca36bc9.png){kind=link}
Existential Comics | Website
Alt Text
“At the heart of Batman’s being, like all theater kids, is a boundless narcissism that eats away at his core.”
Explanation
Many versions of Batman have a strict “no killing” rule, which is exactly the kind of intuition the Trolley Problem is attacking. Why is it different to actively kill someone vs passively letting five people die? In particular, Batman’s version seems to be a sort of “honor code”, which something close to a moral system, but it is entirely inward looking. In other words, fulfilling the honor system doesn’t do good for the world, it elevates the status of the honorable man. In a sense it’s the worst possible way to answer a moral question, “I want to kill the five people because I personally would lose something (my honor)”. Also its pretty showy to dress up as a bat. One might even call him a weirdo.
Transcript
8 Panel Comic
Panel 1: The Riddler stands at the lever explaining his setup of the classic Trolley Problem. Tied to one track are 5 people, and tied to the diverted track is 1 person. A trolley is prepared to mow down the 5 people unless the lever is pulled, diverting it to the path with one person.
Riddler: Alright Batman riddle me this. A trolley is moving down this track and is going to kill five people, but if you switch tracks it will only kill one, do you pull the lever?
Panel 2: Batman shakes his fist at the Riddler
Batman: Curse your implausible games, Riddler!
Panel 3: Batman hesitates in front of the lever, his hand shaking.
Batman: The right thing to do is save five people, but I have sworn to my code of ethics to never kill!
Panel 4: The Riddler exults in the devious dilemma delaying Batman’s decision.
Batman: I cannot do it! I cannot be the one to kill directly!
Riddler: Looks like the Batman has failed Philosophy 101! HAHAHAHAHA!
Panel 5: Batman watches as the trolley splatters 5 people across the track as the Riddler continues in his exultations.
Panel 6: Batman now sits in his Batcave as his Alfred arrives with his dinner on a covered tray.
Alfred: But what I don’t understand Sir, is how upholding your moral code can have more value than their lives?
Panel 7: Batman smoking a cigarette puts on his best grizzled and hard boiled face.
Batman: Because I’m a narcissist, Alfred. I value my own ego above everything, and I didn’t want to lose the “no killing” thing, because I like bragging about it. That’s all.
Panel 8: Alfred is shocked at Batman’s response.
Alfred: Really, I never thought so…
Batman: I dress up as a bat to fight crime. Of course I’m a narcissist. Your kind of a moron, Alfred, honestly.
A healthy person isn’t at risk of immediate death.
This is a choice between 1 dying or 5. A healthy person isn’t about to die.
The equivalent medical situation would be if you were seconds from absolutely certain death and someone took your organs without consent a moment before death.
Yep. This is a choice between allowing five people to die, or killing one to save them. The trolley problem doesn’t talk about healthy or not healthy. It’s a very simple equivalent: do we let people on the organ donor waiting list die, or do we kill you to save them?
The correct choice is to kill one person to save five, as you pointed out. You just happen to be the one person who must be killed. If I had a switch that I could flip, and you would die and your organs would be given to people that need them, I would be flipping that switch. Unfortunately, I do not have that switch, and you must carry out the dying part yourself by your own free will.
Do you no longer think the correct answer is to kill one to save five? What happened?
But you introduced healthy or not healthy by changing the trolley problem into sacrificing a healthy person to save 5 unhealthy people.
In the trolley problem one person is going to die if the switch isn’t thrown. In your organ donation problem, the healthy person is not going to die. It’s no longer the same trolley problem.
Don’t worry! They’ll be perfectly healthy after we chop you up and use your organs to make them healthy.
So I ask again, what are you waiting for? This is the clearly correct choice of action.
You said it was the trolley problem. It isn’t. I explained why and now you are again reposting your different problem that isn’t the trolley problem.
A healthy person who could live for an indefinite period isn’t the same as a person who is seconds away from absolute certain death.