The lever is powered by AI
This is a depiction of John Rawl's "Veil of Ignorance" concept. Where to properly considered whether a society is just, you must consider that may be placed in any part of it.
this post was submitted on 23 Apr 2025
843 points (99.0% liked)
Comic Strips
16160 readers
2247 users here now
Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.
The rules are simple:
- The post can be a single image, an image gallery, or a link to a specific comic hosted on another site (the author's website, for instance).
- The comic must be a complete story.
- If it is an external link, it must be to a specific story, not to the root of the site.
- You may post comics from others or your own.
- If you are posting a comic of your own, a maximum of one per week is allowed (I know, your comics are great, but this rule helps avoid spam).
- The comic can be in any language, but if it's not in English, OP must include an English translation in the post's 'body' field (note: you don't need to select a specific language when posting a comic).
- Politeness.
- Adult content is not allowed. This community aims to be fun for people of all ages.
Web of links
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world: "I use Arch btw"
- !memes@lemmy.world: memes (you don't say!)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I love this tool so much. It stops so much bad pop philosophy dead in its tracks.
Good one
That comic isn't the trolly problem though. For it to be a problem you need to give a shit about both tracks. This is just an image of the real world. :(
For it to be a problem you need to give a shit about both tracks.
For it to be the trolley problem, you have to make a value judgement between action (hitting the lever) and inaction (letting the trolley roll past).
The original conceit of the problem (trolley hits five people or you move the switch and it hits one person) is about the culpability inherent in personal agency. Mathematically killing one person is better than killing five people. But by switching the trolley, the singular death becomes your fault rather than just some event that's happening beyond your control.
This is the real moral dilemma. All the iterations on the trolley problem - questioning which track has a higher value/need - are a divergence from the original psychological problem of assuming culpability for an existing problem by altering it.
Accurate
except the trolley takes 75ish years to kill you.
Not if we get rid of regulations and vaccines.
Not always. How many people died digging the Panama canal, or building the Hoover dam? How many ships just fucking sink with all hands each year because the company doesn't give the first two half-flaccid thrusts of an obligatory marital fuck about safety?
Not always. How many people died digging the Panama canal, or building the Hoover dam?
How many lives were saved as a result of the canal and the dam? These were public works anyway. Profitable for a few, sure. But publicly bankrolled and broadly beneficial for the continent at-large.
the company doesn’t give the first two half-flaccid thrusts of an obligatory marital fuck about safety?
One one track is a pile of money and on another is a collection of workers without hardhats and safety boots, perhaps.
have you considered poetry? this was beautiful and picturesque
The secret is imagery.
That's ok, guy at the lever and the rest of his buddies are working to accelerate that process
The lever be slackin. Let’s get this over and done with
If you're lucky! Many die young from the prioritization of profit over public safety.
Not really.
So like a normal lifespan?
Something I never got about the "tied up on train tracks" trope is that the victim is never tied to anything. Can't they just wiggle out of the way?
I always thought they were tied *to* the tracks
How would you even do that? Train tracks are typically flat against the ground. If you can find a picture of a person being depicted as tied to traditional tracks rather than just being tied up and laying on the tracks, I'd like to see it. I didn't find one from a quick search.
EDIT: Downvote all you want, but please show an example! I'm genuinely curious if anyone has ever shown a person tied to the tracks that makes any logistical sense.
EDIT 2: I've seen a few pictures from searching that show it is possible - I assume it depends on how packed down the planks under the tracks are - but the fact remains that the vast majority of the time, the person is show as just being tied up and laid on the tracks.
No, they're attached to sleepers, and the whole lot sits on a bed of ballast (stones). You could easily move some stones aside and thread the rope through the gap.
Even if that's so, people are never shown tied up that way. They're always just laid onto the tracks.
You don't see all the rope so there could be a loop around the line behind them.
Usually it's clear the rope isn't tied to anything beneath them.
It's to the wooden whatchamacallits orthogonal to the rails
The ones flat against the ground that have been packed down by trains driving over them? I don't think you can usually get under those.
EDIT: I found a few pictures where the ropes do go underneath them - so now the question is, why are people not depicted that way 99% of the time? They're just laid onto the tracks in a way that it would be easy to get out of the way.
Because for the pacing of the scene, "wrapped with ropes" is movie shorthand for "immobilized." Most of the time, most of the audience doesn't really care about the details of the knots.
I think it's also because tying someone up that way is wildly impractical. The fact that nobody wants to show it the proper way is evidence of that.
A bit more practical would be looping the rope under the track itself between the ties; especially if you found a viaduct or something where there is no ballast you could just loop the rope right under.
I doubt every track is easy to find spots to do that. Snidely Whiplash would have to go out and survey all the tracks to find ideal spots, or dig holes ahead of time. That's a lot of trouble when he could just shoot them instead!
Snidely Whiplash only needs to find a bridge, preferably one over a large ravine.
Then he just has to tie the hostage to the center of the bridge. Then when the hero makes a daring rescue Snidely can blow up the bridge.
And, like I said, the bridge won't have ballast so you don't have to dig out around the rails to tie Pettycoat McVictim town in the first place.
Ties. Those are called railroad ties.
I'm very good at wiggling
You know you've got a point…
Honestly, I usually saw this alongside Wile E. Coyote style antics performed by someone literally twirling a mustache, so I was never looking for consistency!
And less charitably, the character tied rarely seemed to do more than protest delicately even when she wasn't tied...
i think what is going on here is making an example. This is not a moral problem with some kind of inevitability. This is an execution that is trying to make a point