• peregrin5@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    The guy who might wander onto tracks doesn’t even exist in reality. He’s a hypothetical in the mind of the guy with his hands on the lever.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      7 days ago

      Nah, something like 1% of people who transition regret it. Which is stunningly low considering the enormity of the change. 1% of people are going to regret any major life decision.

      • RedditRefugee69@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 days ago

        Yeah I don’t know what the point of denying facts is other than to try to out-propaganda the other side.

        It’s very rare. Not imaginary, but not common either.

    • Soleos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      7 days ago

      Heh it’s a fun “gotcha” kind of modification. Alas, it misunderstands the thought experiment. They’re not changing the emotional valence. They are removing a fundamental aspect of a dilemma: harm. One of the purposes of the trolley problem is to provoke the thinker into questioning what they believe about moral responsibility and (in)action.

      • Doxin@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        It’s changing the problem from definite harm and potential upside to definite upside and potential harm.

        It makes sense people value potential harm different from potential upside.

          • Doxin@pawb.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 days ago

            The potential harm in the comic is lack of buff dudes, the potential upside in the classic is more good people being alive.

            • Soleos@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              5 days ago

              That does not make sense. What does “harm” mean to you? Less good is not “potential harm”. To put it another way, let’s assume you and I are completely independent and I have to moral responsibility to give you money. If I chose to not give you any money, you would not be harmed. If I gifted you $100, you would not be harmed. If I gifted you $20 you would not be harmed because I did not gift you $100.

  • Like the wind...@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Doesn’t really work since having to detransition or whatever isn’t as comparable to being unable to transition at all but yeah I get it just eradicate transphobia

    Okay so I just realized the point went way over my head yeah, the fact it’s not comparable is the point, yeah very 🤓 comment earlier 🤦

    The hypothetical guy wandering the track is a scapegoat to excuse withholding rights from trans people as a whole. Anyone stating this guy exists and to prevent this from happening does not care about that hypothetical guy, they only want trans people to die.

  • Broadfern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    It’s almost as if proper access to healthcare and allowing each person to make their own medical decisions with a qualified provider prevents all of this issue. Detransition is also none of the fucking government’s business! (ᐛ)