A philosophical question

[davyboy]

Imagine this scenario:

 

You are driving along a straight road when a young child runs out in front of you.

You know that if you brake you will not be able to stop and you will kill the child

What do you do?

 

1) swerve to miss the child

 

BUT

 

2) swerve, you crash and probably die.

 

3) , you have a family , wife and children

 

4) you swerve and hit 6 OAPs at a bus stop

 

5) you swerve and hit 6 children at the bus stop

 

What’s the relevance of this question that came up in my g/daughter’s philosophy class at uni.

 

What do the designers of a driverless car decide the car should do in similar situation?

Can they decide?

 

Is one child’s life worth more than 6 OAPs.?

Or 6 innocent bystander children

 

I don’t know what I would do.

Do you?

[cgksheff]

Option 2 is the only one that does not include a certainty.

So you should swerve, crash and possibly not die.

 

But, really, there is no simple answer. It is designed to show what students have learned of various philosophical situations.

[*_ash_*]

You might like this Harvard lecture davyboy...

 

 

I find this Professor quite easy to watch, and very interesting.

[El Cid]

Imagine this scenario:

 

You are driving along a straight road when a young child runs out in front of you.

You know that if you brake you will not be able to stop and you will kill the child

What do you do?

 

1) swerve to miss the child

 

BUT

 

2) swerve, you crash and probably die.

 

 

These made-up situations are never like real life, the first reaction is to brake.

[davyboy]

Thank you for that Ash.

The trolley and fat man examples given in the lecture were also in my g/daughters course and which the pair of us have discussed.

Without a conclusion as to what was "right" on my part at least.

You may be interested in a book she bought me called:

"The InfiniteTortoise" by Joel Levy on Curious thought experiments of histories great thinkers.

It's a bit heavy for me but it is thought provoking.

 

---------- Post added 03-02-2018 at 21:40 ----------

 

I'll send that link to my g/daughter

[*_ash_*]

These made-up situations are never like real life, the first reaction is to brake.

 

Philistine!

 

Thank you for that Ash.

 

No prob. Was first thing I thought of, when I read your post.

 

The trolley and fat man examples given in the lecture were also in my g/daughters course and which the pair of us have discussed.

Without a conclusion as to what was "right" on my part at least.

You may be interested in a book she bought me called:

"The InfiniteTortoise" by Joel Levy on Curious thought experiments of histories great thinkers.

It's a bit heavy for me but it is thought provoking.

 

I'll send that link to my g/daughter

 

Yes, it's a good one, there are loads more if you have a look. This one, I think the first 10-15 minutes is probably good for someone 16 or under (or GCSE level), and depending on their intellect, the latter part is for more advanced students/ages.

 

-

 

And thank you for the book recommendation.

[tzijlstra]

It’s incredibly daft as a question - the reason it is brought up is to make us fear AI. But it is so exaggerated that it is clearly propaganda against machine logic.I nearly had a 12 year old on the bonnet and my right food plus assisted braking saved her life without question.

 

If you are wondering about credentials - I have been involved with research into similar topics for a long time.

[*_ash_*]

It’s incredibly daft as a question - the reason it is brought up is to make us fear AI. But it is so exaggerated that it is clearly propaganda against machine logic.I nearly had a 12 year old on the bonnet and my right food plus assisted braking saved her life without question.

 

If you are wondering about credentials - I have been involved with research into similar topics for a long time.

 

Rubbish. OK the example might not have been well written (so this is just a dig at a member as you usually do), but this is a general philosophical question that has been around far longer than SF, AI, the net, or even Jesus.

 

If anything, it's actually probably never been a more pertinent query, than since AI. If computers are going to control things, then it has to make decisions, and this is the type of thing that it will have to be taught what to do.

 

(yes, we've established that if person runs out in front, then one brakes... I would think that is one of the algorithms written into the software)

[Ontarian1981]

Imagine this scenario:

 

You are driving along a straight road when a young child runs out in front of you.

You know that if you brake you will not be able to stop and you will kill the child

What do you do?

 

1) swerve to miss the child

 

BUT

 

2) swerve, you crash and probably die.

 

3) , you have a family , wife and children

 

4) you swerve and hit 6 OAPs at a bus stop

 

5) you swerve and hit 6 children at the bus stop

 

What’s the relevance of this question that came up in my g/daughter’s philosophy class at uni.

 

What do the designers of a driverless car decide the car should do in similar situation?

Can they decide?

 

Is one child’s life worth more than 6 OAPs.?

Or 6 innocent bystander children

 

I don’t know what I would do.

Do you?

Nobody knows the answer to that question unless they have been in that situation, trust me I have been there twice and my reactions were not thought through in an analytical way. I just reacted as best I could, not shall I do this or that, you do what you do out of instinct and fear.

Edited February 4, 2018 by Ontarian1981

[cgksheff]

.........

and my right food plus assisted braking saved her life without question.

 

If you are wondering about credentials - I have been involved with research into similar topics for a long time.

 

Imagine how terrible things could have been if you had eaten at McDonalds??