The dilemma is spurious. Fat men (fat like they can block a tunnel) don't go hiking to begin with.What are your thoughts about this dilemma? What should you do? — javi2541997
The only moral option if you truly feel like its morally wrong to use the dynamite is to abstain from the decision, making the decision not to use the dynamite for yourself.
The other solutions simply pass the buck, shift the moral burden.
I simply hold they cannot morally kill the fat man without his permission. — ernest meyer
What you shared is very important because it is something I was waiting for. Exactly, what can happen if we pass the buck? Imagine we do so and them there are different criteria. 8 hikers would think it is good to blow up the fat man but the other 8 not. This a dilemma inside the dilemma itself but as you perfectly explained one will do it anyway because at least one of them will give up about morals and them would blow him up.
Another scenario here could be if the losing of time debating if they should or not exploding him can actually kill them because they do not take solutions in extreme context — javi2541997
Its possible none of the people want to kill the fatman and in that case I see no moral violation, except that of the fatman. A moral person would volunteer to die to save the others and if fatman doesn’t then fatman isn’t acting morally. — DingoJones
That’s how I’d rank the moral decisions. — DingoJones
That’s how I’d rank the moral decisions. — DingoJones
setting up collapses into the hole along with their corpses and you still can't get out. What rotten luck! — unenlightened
What should they do? — javi2541997
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.