Trolley Problem Simulator

What is this?

The Trolley Problem is a thought experiment in ethics: a runaway trolley will kill five people unless you divert it to a side track where it will kill one. It reveals deep tensions between utilitarian (greatest good) and deontological (rights-based) moral frameworks.

📖 Deep Dive

Analogy 1

Think of it like being the only lifeguard at a beach: you see five people drowning on the left and one on the right. You can only swim one direction. Saving five means the one drowns. The trolley problem asks whether actively choosing who dies is morally different from letting fate decide.

Analogy 2

Imagine a doctor with five dying patients who each need a different organ. A healthy visitor walks in. Should the doctor harvest the visitor's organs to save five? Most people say no — revealing that our moral intuitions go beyond simple math of lives saved.

🎯 Simulator Tips

Beginner

Start with the Classic Trolley scenario — about 80% of people choose to pull the lever

Intermediate

Use the Global Stats button to compare your choices against published research data

Expert

The mini pie chart on the canvas tracks your utilitarian vs deontological ratio across all scenarios

📚 Glossary

Trolley Problem

Ethical thought experiment: should you divert a runaway trolley to kill one person instead of five?

Deontological Ethics

Moral framework judging actions by rules/duties (e.g., 'do not kill') regardless of consequences.

Consequentialism

Moral framework judging actions solely by outcomes — choosing the option that maximizes well-being.

Utilitarianism

Consequentialist theory: the right action is whatever produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number.

Double Effect

Doctrine distinguishing between intended harm (pulling someone onto tracks) and foreseen side-effects (diverting trolley).

Fat Man Variant

Trolley problem variation: would you push a large person off a bridge to stop the trolley? Tests intuitions about directness.

Moral Intuition

Pre-theoretical gut feeling about right and wrong, often inconsistent across trolley variants.

Trolley Dilemma in AI

Application to autonomous vehicles and AI decision-making: how should self-driving cars resolve unavoidable harm?

Moral Machine

MIT experiment collecting millions of responses to trolley-like dilemmas for self-driving cars across cultures.

Moral Luck

Concept that moral judgment can be influenced by factors beyond one's control, relevant to trolley outcomes.

Virtue Ethics

Framework focused on character traits: what would a virtuous person do in this situation?

Action vs Omission

Distinction between actively causing harm (pulling lever) and allowing harm through inaction (doing nothing).

🏆 Key Figures

Philippa Foot (1967)

Oxford philosopher who introduced the trolley problem as a thought experiment in ethical theory

Judith Jarvis Thomson (1985)

MIT philosopher who developed the fat man variant and deeper analysis of the trolley problem

Peter Singer (1972)

Princeton utilitarian philosopher who argues the consequentialist answer (save five) is clearly correct

Iyad Rahwan (2018)

MIT researcher who led the Moral Machine experiment, the largest study of moral preferences globally

Thomas Aquinas (1274)

Medieval philosopher who developed the Doctrine of Double Effect, central to trolley problem analysis

🎓 Learning Resources

The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of Double Effect [paper]
The original paper introducing the trolley problem (Oxford Review, 1967)
The Moral Machine experiment [paper]
Nature paper analyzing 40 million decisions in trolley-like dilemmas across 233 countries (2018)
Moral Machine [article]
MIT's interactive platform for exploring trolley-like ethical dilemmas
Stanford Encyclopedia - Doing vs. Allowing Harm [article]
Philosophical analysis of the key distinction in trolley problem ethics

💬 Message to Learners

Explore the fascinating world of ethical dilemmas. There are no wrong answers — only deeper understanding of your own moral framework!