Скачать с ютуб Kill 1 to Save 5? Consequentialism vs. Deontology в хорошем качестве

Kill 1 to Save 5? Consequentialism vs. Deontology

**Correction** The video inaccurately says that "according to deontology, there are some moral rules that should never be broken." But that only accurately describes "absolutist" versions of deontology (such as Immanuel Kant's). Other versions of deontology can allow for any rule to be broken. What makes a view deontological is primarily that regards morality as fundamentally involving duties and principles, and that those duties are not determined solely by the good or bad consequences of your actions. Video Description: Is it ever ok to kill an innocent person? According to Consequentialism, morality is ultimately about doing whatever has the best consequences. But according to [absolutist] Deontology, there are some moral rules that should never be broken. Philosophers Philippa Foot and Judith Jarvis Thomson offer some interesting thought experiments (i.e. hypothetical scenarios) to help us think about these issues. In the famous Trolley Problem example, there's a runaway trolley about to kill five people on the track ahead, but you can divert the trolley so that it hits only one person instead. And in the Transplant Case, there's a surgeon who can murder an innocent person so that he can harvest the organs and save five people from organ failure. Both cases involve killing 1 person to save 5 others. Media Sources: Illustrations: https://www.freepik.com (and macrovector) Music: https://www.purple-planet.com Sound Effects: https://www.zapsplat.com