Our philosophy primer asks us, would we divert a train about to kill 6 people by switching the points so it only kills 1?
We are in the midst of a time of great political turmoil in the UK. I have no idea how things will turn out but it is clear that cans have been opened that contain far worse than worms. And someone threw away the can.
So my title is a bit of an annoying tease. I offer no great wisdom on how to move forward. But I want to clarify the question we are asking every time we do politics. Here are some scenarios. I invented all the stats:
- A new drug is on the market. For a million pounds per person its targeted application has a 50/50 chance of eliminating a particularly nasty cancer which five people a year get. You paying?
- It is clear that seat belts save lives. But 3 in 10,000 very unlucky participants in serious accidents lose their lives because they are wearing one. If they hadn't clunk-clicked they'd have survived. You overturning the legislation?
- Cannabis is, statistically, safer than alcohol. You decriminalising one and stopping the other?
- Every now and then a boxer dies from a blow to the head, a batsman from a ball to the head and a biker from a road to the head. What you banning?
- A vaccine has been invented which stops people getting measles, an illness which kills several people a year and, if unchecked, can reach epidemic proportions and take many more lives. The vaccine has slight risks of complications? You making it compulsory?
We can fiddle with as many details as we like and make petty adjustments to trivial matters as much as we like but this distracts us from the big question. Politics is about this. Who dies?
2 comments:
We are a parliamentary democracy and as such we vote for our elected representatives to make balanced judgements in favour of the majority. Unfortunately our parliamentary parties have failed to act in a reasonable way over Brexit and have let their desire for power overrule their other commitments. What if every member of parliament just voted for brexit based on their constituencies wishes? Has this been tested? The right and proper thing to happen now is for the government to resign, each party makes clear what their brexit stance is, and the country chooses. Failing that can we have a hologram of Jeff Astel put in charge of the country and he rules it as a (deceased) virtual dictator.
I like your thinking 'the needs of the many always outweigh the needs of the few or the one' (Star Trek II and John Stuart Mill) life does have consequences and part of life is death.
Post a Comment