Yeah, because next time you would need all 5 of the others to decide not to kill you, whereas you and the bound one now have rapport, you’ve both saved one another and both have slain 5 others
Why would you need all 5? It’s enough when one of them is in that position. That’s five times as likely when it’s 5 people versus only one. Maybe next time you’re on the other side and make the person pull the lever even harder when they know you but not the single person. You might say, why would they return the favor when they know you didn’t, but you just killed the one person who knew.
But that’s the problem about consequentialism. It’s easy to say, just choose the best option, when in reality you never know all the variables.
What choice did that person make? If was freed by them solo or from a group that could influence the decision and their reaction
That person didn’t pull the lever to save you alone and let 5 people die. Will you return the favor?
Yeah, because next time you would need all 5 of the others to decide not to kill you, whereas you and the bound one now have rapport, you’ve both saved one another and both have slain 5 others
Why would you need all 5? It’s enough when one of them is in that position. That’s five times as likely when it’s 5 people versus only one. Maybe next time you’re on the other side and make the person pull the lever even harder when they know you but not the single person. You might say, why would they return the favor when they know you didn’t, but you just killed the one person who knew.
But that’s the problem about consequentialism. It’s easy to say, just choose the best option, when in reality you never know all the variables.