Judith Thomson Canonizing the Trolley Problem

Posted: Wed, Oct 1, 2025

The trolley problem as depicted in The Good Place, S2E6.

The trolley problem

• Narrowly: Why is it permissible to sacrifice one to save five in the Bystander case but not in the Footbridge case?
• Broadly: None of the views we’ve discussed so far survives the trolley cases.

A few variants I’d like us to focus on

• Driver: As the driver, you can divert onto another track, killing one, or stay on the current track, killing five.
• Bystander: The driver cannot act, but you are a bystander who can pull a switch to divert the runaway trolley.
• Footbridge: The driver cannot act, but you are a bystander who can push a “fat man [sic]” down a bridge to stop the runaway trolley, killing him.
  • Thomson’s proposal: Acting on the threat vs. the person.
• Two Trolleys: The driver cannot act, but you are a bystander who can pull a switch to divert the runaway trolley. Except the switch also diverts a second trolley, killing one.

Variant	Intuition	Utilitarianism	Intending/Merely Foressing	Doing/Allowing	Threat/Person
Driver	Divert	Divert	Divert	Divert	Divert
Bystander	Divert	Divert	Divert	Don’t divert	Divert
Footbridge	Don’t push	Push	Don’t push?	Don’t push	Don’t push
Two Trolleys	Don’t divert?	Divert	Divert	Don’t divert	Divert?

Could you permissibly divert in the original Bystander case?

Three Tracks: The driver cannot act, and you are not merely a bystander—you are on a second side track. This gives you the option to switch the trolley onto your track, killing yourself.

• If you wouldn’t do this: Could you permissible do what you wouldn’t do to yourself to the one in the original Bystander case?
• If you would do this: This has to be supererogatory? Could you impose it onto somebody else?