Trolley problem

A family of moral dilemmas asks whether someone may redirect a lethal threat to kill fewer people and save more. Its variations test how consequences, intentions, and action shape moral judgment.

Trolley driver: A trolley dilemma in which a driver can steer a runaway trolley toward one person instead of five. The original setup makes intervention a direct choice between two outcomes.
Consequentialism: A family of ethical theories that evaluates actions by the value of their consequences. It typically favors diverting the trolley when doing so saves more lives.
Philippa Foot: A British philosopher whose work in ethics introduced the trolley problem’s early form. Her 1967 paper posed a case about diverting a runaway trolley.
Experimental philosophy: An approach to philosophy that uses empirical methods to investigate people’s judgments and concepts. Researchers use trolley variations to test how people’s moral judgments shift with case details.
Moral responsibility: The status of an agent as answerable or blameworthy for an action or outcome. The cases ask how responsibility changes when harm is chosen, redirected, or left untouched.
Footbridge dilemma: A trolley dilemma in which a person can stop a trolley by pushing someone from a bridge onto its track. It tests why direct bodily force feels different from switching a track.
Deontological ethics: Ethical theories that assess actions by duties, rules, or constraints rather than consequences alone. Its constraints can forbid using a person as a means, even to save five.
The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect: Philippa Foot’s 1967 essay examining abortion and the doctrine of double effect through moral cases. It introduced the trolley comparison that became the dilemma’s starting point.
Joshua Greene: An American psychologist and philosopher known for experimental research on moral judgment. His studies used personal and impersonal trolley dilemmas to examine moral cognition.
Moral uncertainty: Uncertainty about which moral principles or theories are correct and how to act under that uncertainty. Conflicting verdicts leave open how decisions should proceed when ethical theories disagree.

Linked from 16 pages