This problem is all about how if you pull the lever then you are the one killing the person. I think even worse to not pull the lever and let your inaction kill 5 people.
I pull the lever.
Yeah I get the argument for killing someone directly vs killing someone indirectly, but if you're put in that scenario where someone dies regardless then I feel you should at least minimize the fatalities.
As a utilitarian, in this scenario, I always pull the lever. As you said, this is quite infamous and I have read over a few variations to this problem. One I find a little more interesting is as follows:
There is a runaway trolley barreling down the railroad tracks. On the tracks are 5 people unable to move. If nothing gets done then all 5 of these people would die. You are observing this from a bridge directly above the railroad track and standing next to you os a rather hefty man. You conclude that pushing this man from the bridge will stop the trolley in its tracks. All 5 people on the track will he saved, but of course the hefty man will perish. Do you push the 1 man off the bridge to save the 5? Does being directly responsible for killing a man by pushing him off the bridge change anything rather than indirectly killing a man by changing the tracks?
I’d love to hear more variations others may have to this problem.
I have heard of that variant, and if you haven't heard of or played this game I would suggest it: https://store.steampowered.com/app/15826...oblem_Inc/