I have a bad habit of asking people to talk to me, before not replying a few messages in. It’s nothing personal, but i suppose I just struggle to hold a conversation unless there’s something I’m incredibly invested in.
now, i can get deep into a conversation, but i don't think i've ever quite turned a conversation into just what i think we're talking about. and what we're talking about isn't just small talk. sure, i am curious about you, but not just for the sake of curiosity. i want to know you better. i want to be able to have conversations with you.
That’s kind of you, really. I just suppose it’s a matter of staying engaged? I have answered the same questions about my hobbies and things a million times over. Getting to know me is not an easy feat, and it shouldn’t be.
=It is tru€, I'd a|so add that som€tim€s a m€ssag€ can just f€€| too autoconc|usiv€ to actua||y fo||ow up without it f€€|ing €xtr€m€|y forc€d and awkward
your hobbies aren't what define you, no more than mine do. i have a better question. do you divert the trolley to kill one to save five? what is your take on the trolley problem? because honestly, i'm not sure myself.
In general, I find the trolley problem overdone and faulty. The idea of inaction being action is age old, but I do not think anyone could reasonably say how they’d react in a moment that quick. And then there’s the argument that both timelines happen, and it splits as a timeline per decision. But that’s not relevant, my mind is wandering. The obvious answer is the pull the lever. It is the ‘correct’ choice in the eyes of many. And it is also quite close to my personal experience. Sacrifice for the masses. The question that is more interesting to me, is if you pull the lever if your personal friend is the one, and the five are strangers.
there we go, now i think we're getting somewhere. that's a much, much harder question. you're right of course, the traditional trolley problem has a "correct" answer, but we don't normally encounter it like that. and we're a lot more likely to run into your version. just, really, in general. people aren't always going to die from the choices we make, but they will often suffer because of our choices. being selfish because you like someone can often mean more will be hurt. that's the nature of the trolley problem, and i can't say i wouldn't choose to sacrifice people to save one person i care about. i'm maybe not that good of a person. i'm selfish.
So do you believe that that decision is the objective wrong one, while still saying you’d make it? What about that makes you a bad person? I believe this starts to get into the real moral questions now. What is a worse person? Someone who views everyone on the track simply as numbers, knowing the lowest number of deaths is the correct one? Or someone who makes strong decisions based on emotional connections and loyalty? Why does it make you a bad person to take care of the people you love? You have no way of knowing if the five are good or bad people. But you do know the one is valuable in your eyes.
i don't think that really makes you a bad person, it just doesn't make you a paragon of perfection. see, i'm not the one putting strangers or someone i care about on the tracks. i just have to choose what happens to them. the "good" choice is to not care. i am not a perfect person. i'm sure insurance companies can tell you the numbers at which one side is better to pull the lever than the other, but those companies are so evil that they shouldn't have much of a say. i just don't have it in me to be the best a person can possibly be. if i was on the journey of samsara, i would not be reaching enlightenment. but being unenlightened has its benefits. worldly pleasure are a thing, after all. god though, a worse person? i can think of worse people who exit out there, and i have a lot of power. in a sense, i am making a choice with the trolley problem every day. every minute, even. would i be happy with someone's blood on my hands, knowing i saved others? i helped kill her imperious condescension, but i didn't do the final blow. does that mean i didn't do enough to solve the trolley problem there? or was i helping choose a side? i suppose she was also the trolley, but that makes it even messier.
Again, I’m curious about your own definitions. Why is the perfect choice not to care? Caring and empathy are highly valued traits. You are making a lot of assumptions about what you believe to be correct about defining what a good person is. The perfect person, as you phrased it. If you were on the tracks, you would view whoever saved you as a good person, regardless of what side you were on. You seem to be targeting unreal levels of perfection by a standard you’ve invented yourself. But if you’re imperfect, so is your idea of what makes somebody good, clearly. Helping to kill a genocidal alien is objectively good. It seems you are moving into ideals of heroics. It reminds me of somebody actually.
i might be stuck thinking about it in terms of heroics, yeah. and i think i get why. getting called gods and heroes, it weighs on you. and, i did lose people i care about. it's just, i'm a walking trolley problem. i can fix anything with the right instructions. only, what i fix, i break how things were for everything else. if i use my reality warping powers to make it so someone's parent doesn't die, there is a version of reality that just ends because of that. something worse than normal death happens because of that to them. which is why i go very delicately with those powers. and you're right, i am targeting unreal levels of perfection. i'm still only human, despite everything. i just, i don't like having blood on my hands. i don't like that it's what we had to do, even if it was the right thing to do. it was probably the objectively correct thing to do if everyone was to survive, but i regret it. i regret needing to do it. i regret having to go through it to survive. "i wish the ring had never come to me, i wish none of this had happened." yes, i know the things gandalf says, but the ring came to me, as it were. and, it was not fun. oh, to have a normal life. would you choose a normal life?