Introduction
Reconstruction of the Thomson’s Argument
In the speeding trolley incident distribution of bad is less when one person dies and five people live. The points of this argument are is it allowable for Edward to turn the Trolley on the one man and the UN acceptability of George to shove the fat man off the bridge. If Edward continued on the path that the trolley was on he would have killed five and the fat man would have lived but for a good distribution of bad one had to die and five live. This presents the first premise of the argument. The second premise is on the actions of George: by pushing the fat man of the bridge the distribution of bad is minimized as he in the process also saves five and kills one. If the fat man had no control on the events then he should not complain of the results of the bad distribution hence giving credence to the actions of Frank and Edward turning the trolleys. If the fat man would have done something to alter the outcome of the bad distribution then the actions of George to shove him off the bridge to the path of the trolley is unacceptable (William19).
Conclusion
In Thomson’s argument it is seen that actions that are thought of should also be judged illustrated by George’s actions but preventative actions or bad distribution reducing actions such as the ones demonstrated by Frank should not be looked at harshly.
Work Cited
William, H. Critical Thinking: An introduction to the Basic Skills. New York: Publisher Broadview Press, 2009.
