I found this on another forum in-which I'm a member of.

Some might of come across it before, although it would be interesting to see how it goes here.
~Joey

Not sure. Is it Denise's job to switch the path of the train?

Not sure. How large is the large man? Is it possible that he is so large the train would just bounce off and derail without killing him?

No. There's no possible way that they could confirm the man is a perfect match for all the cases just by having him sit in the waiting room.

Yes. One or 5 in this case? Sure.
No. I'm not for human shields. Sure it seems similar to the above, but I couldn't do it I guess.
Not sure. Theoretically speaking, I'd say yes (5 for one again). I cannot however answer the question with limited (black and white) information, nor would I want to be in the position to make this call. It's like an in between of #1 and #2 imo.

Yes/Yes/No

Though I should have probably said not sure for the second question..

Yes/No/No

In the first example, you can't exactly guarantee that the one person will die. Still, 5 vs 1...

In the other two you are directly killing someone, not increasing the probability they will do. That's murder, no matter which way you cut it.

I agree with bfarber. The first question is saying that either 1 or 5 will die. But, in the second, there is no way of knowing if the train will actually derail, it only seems to be speculation. It might not, and five people will still die, anyway. Then you've killed someone else purposely.

In the third, I would say no, because simply killing the man in order to let the other people live is murder, plain and simple. It is not for any one person/institution to decide to take someone's organs against their will simply because other people can use them. There's a multitude of other factors, like possible rejection of the organs, but I need to get to work.

Yes/no/no for me too.

Yes/No/No for me.

Less people die in the first scenario, and in the second and third ones someone is being actively killed.

Not sure/No/No

I say not sure for the first, because it is quite similar to the third one, if she changes the point then she actively kills one guy to save five. It is a tricky one that one.

Yes/No/No from me too.

No/No/No from me

I truly believe if you are meant to die you die, plus with the last one all five do not actually have to die, they could ask if the man will be willing to donate a kidney, plus you don't have to die to donate bone marrow .. you cannot play God with people, which is what you are doing

Plus would you say Yes to the first one if it was someone you knew?

It's true, and I considered that, but the way the questions are worded makes it tricky as well. The first question says changing the point would send the train in a separate direction killing one person. It's hard to say for sure it would kill that person. One person can get out of the way of a train a lot easier than 5, for example, and if the train hits a rock or anything that would make it move in an unintended direction, it's more probable to miss one person than 5. That's the only reason I think that would be better than letting it stay on course to kill 5.

1) Not Sure. By taking no action 5 people die. By taking action you become directly responsible for that other person's death. I couldn't make that decision unless I was in that situation, and with any luck I'll never have to.

2) No. Too many variables. Is it a passenger train? Will the train definitely derail? If that man wishes to jump, that is his decision. Nobody has the right to make the decision for him.

3) No. Again, if that man wishes to sacrifice himself to save the five patients that is his choice. Nobody else has the right to make that decision.

I voted.

Yes, No, No

I didn't see the point either in saying would die but it easily got changed to "murder" and second questions answer was the first, as for the last it would be the same as the first. Although the second is quite pointless for me, I don't see how derailing a train would save more lifes and of course "murder" being the first stupid thing.

The last one just amused me.
~Joey

I was thinking about that (along more of the lines of intervention = responsible for killed lives), however at the same time, knowing you could choose between 1 and 5, you are therefore responsible for the 5 deaths by your inaction...

So I'd go yes/no/no, with the 2nd one informing the man of what he could do. However really "You're fat enough to stop the train" is a horrible comment to make, and he'll probably cry...

Or turn violent!

You never know these days, once upon a time you'd see those offended walking away or having a wee little verbal go and then a full on wrestling match.
~Joey

doesn't she kill herself in the 1st question?
anyway even if she isn't I still wouldn't be sure, if I don't know the 5 people on the train perron and I know the one in the yard, I think I let it crash...