Farid 1

Alizia Farid
Bus 102
Section 24
1 June 2019

Edmonds, D. (2015). Would you kill the fat man?: The trolley problem and what your answer tells us
about right and wrong. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Introduction:

This review intends to evaluate the ideas and arguments presented in David Edmond’s Would you kill the
fat man?: The trolley problem and what your answer tells us about right and wrong. In his book, Edmond
takes the famous trolley problem and alters the framework in order to show the many ethical views that
people have. With the philosophies of Immanuel Kant, Aristotle, John Rawls, and many others, Edmonds
demonstrates how different circumstances can ultimately affect a person’s ethics. The reason as to why
the trolley problem is so famous is because of its no-one-wins outcome. In the problem, a trolley is
quickly going down the track. However, further down there are five people that are tied to the train track.
You are right next to a switch and if pulled, it can change the train’s course but there is another obstacle
in the way. On the other side of the track, a single man is tied down and if the lever is pulled then the train
would come down in the single man’s direction. Ultimately, it is up to you whether you choose to save
the five lives at stake or the one life at stake. Either way, someone will die in this situation no matter the
decision made. The question here, is it ethically better to save five lives rather than the one. Traditionally,
the responses have all been in favor of killing the one man in order save the lives of the five others. Five
lives is better to save instead of the one . Therefore, considered to be morally ethical. The author,
however, takes the scenario and changes some major key factors. Now, you are overlooking an overpass
alongside a heavier man and at the same time, see a train quickly approaching five people. Immediately,
you realize you can push the fat man off the overpass and in the direct path of the trolley. By doing this,
one could potentially save the five people because the weight of the fat man is just enough to cease the
trolley. In this new scenario from Edmonds, most people would not save the five because they would
have to put the innocent fat man in harm’s way. In the original problem, the fat man was already tied
down making the decision easy for the person to pull the lever and save the five. Both the trolley
situations are essentially similar but in the new one, many now face an ethical dilemma. The author calls
this dilemma, “trolleyology.” This is where one has to make a similar ethical choice to that of the trolley
scenario.

By altering the scenario for this relatively easy problem, Edmonds has created a moral debate with the
different philosophies of Aristotle, Kant, etc. Edmonds puts the reader’s ethical morals to the test by
creating new dire situations. To further support his fat man theory, Edmonds provides historical ethical
dilemmas to find similarities. Such as Churchill's choice to have the Nazi’s bomb Southeast London
rather than Central London due to the lesser population of the Southeast. Edmonds is not looking for a
right answer for these scenarios by demonstrating the many views of the different philosopher but instead
looking at how a person reasons between their own version of right and wrong.
 Farid 2

The book itself was not only very informative but also challenge my own personal ethics and reflect on
them. The read itself was thorough and not a straight read, Although, it did spark an internal debate inside
of me. Therefore, I feel that the author did a wonderful job informing the reader about one’s own
philosophies in dealing with the challenges of a unsavory situation.

Background Information:

David Edmonds received his PhD in philosophy from Oxford University. His PhD studies focused on the
different debates of many famous philosophies, which can be seen in the book. He has also written 4
other noticeable books in his career. Currently, he is a senior research associate at Oxford University’s
centre for practical ethics and he produces a podcast called philosophy bites that has been downloaded 35
million times. Given the author’s credentials and research of famous philosophies to describe ethical
decision making, I say the author is within the limits to talk about moral philosophy with alternate
scenarios. Also, given that the book was published in 2013, it is still very relevant piece in modern
society.

Summary:

The book starts off with Edmonds describing Winston Churchill’s own ethical dilemma. In which,
Churchill decided to have the Nazis attack Southeast London instead of Central London due to the
Southeast side having a lesser population. Edmonds acknowledges that Churchill's situation was a no-
one-would-truly win one, but a decision had to be made in order to take down the Nazis. In a virtually,
unwinnable situation, Churchill made his own ethical decision which he thought was the best choice he
could make given the circumstances. By sacrificing the lives of the lesser population for the greater
population. In the book, the author takes the decision made by Churchill and makes it logical and
practical to the reader given the circumstances.

In chapter 2, Edmonds introduces the Trolley Problem and idea of Trolleyology, which is the idea of
choosing the better of the least satisfying of choices given the problem. Even though, we would like to
have ideal solutions sometimes it is not always possible. Therefore, one must rely on one’s own
perception of right and wrong in order to guide them to make the best possible choice. Soon after,
Edmond describes Philippa Foot’s aristotelian philosophies, who believed character was the basis and key
force in producing behavior. Then he goes into the philosophies of Saint Thomas Aquinas and the
Doctrine of Double Effect or DDE. In the DDE, it states that unethical behavior can be alright if done in
the manner of self-defense. For example, in the US, murder is forgiven if it is in the form of self-defense
and not planned.

In chapter 5 of the book, Edmonds produces the same trolley situation (as seen in chapter 2) but with
different variations leading to different ethics results. In this new variation of the trolley problem:
“There’s a very fat man leaning over the railing watching the trolley. If you were to push him
over the footbridge he would tumble down and smash on to the track below. He’s so obeses that
his bulk would bring the trolley to a juddering halt. Sadly, the process would kill the fat man. But
it would save the other five” (52).
 Farid 3

According to Edmonds, Trolleyology is the setting ground for many intricate ethical decisions. The
examples, supports, and research, shows the reasoning behind each decision and how they reach them. In
this chapter, the author believes that the choices made in trolleyology helps set up values for the person.

Evaluation:

One strength of Edmond’s book is the examples. Each example presented in the book not only supported
his theory of trolleyology but also fit perfectly with the unsavory situation. With each example provided
in the book, the author shows how sometimes ethical decisions aren't always so clear black and white.
When Edmonds creates a scenario, the reader could better understand the circumstances and connect
better to the book.

One weakness of the book would be the disorganized structure of the book itself. Unfortunately, the
author’s central claim was made halfway through the book. If the claim had been made early on,
specifically right after the first chapter, then I believe the read would have been much smoother.

Even though I have not experience an ethical dilemma as portrayed by Edmonds, the book still has gotten
me to think about my own ethics. The book has gotten me to think of how i justify what is right and
wrong. Also, the book has taught how to approach an undesirable problem.

Conclusion:

Even though the organization of the book was not ideal and led to a choppy read, the book still
accomplished its goal. To get people to understand how one makes and comes to a decision in an
unethical dilemma. The use of different philosophies, scenarios, and examples were the best and most
powerful strengths of the book.