Test on The Trolley Problem: Moral Philosophy and Ethics

Question 1: The BMVI Commission's 2017 report on automated and connected driving concluded that autonomous vehicles should be programmed to make decisions based on specific value-of-life considerations.

A. Ano

B. Ne

Explanation: The BMVI Commission's 2017 report states that 'In the event of unavoidable accident situations, any weighting of human lives based on personal characteristics (age, gender, physical or mental constitution) is strictly prohibited.' This directly contradicts the idea of programming for specific value-of-life considerations.

Question 2: According to the provided study materials, which of the following are criticisms leveled against the usefulness of the trolley problem as a tool for ethical or psychological study?

A. It presents scenarios that are too extreme and unconnected to real-life moral situations.

B. It overly complicates moral decision-making by introducing too many variables, making results inconsistent.

C. It reduces ethical problems to mere arithmetic by eliminating morally relevant relationships.

D. It provides only a partial measure of utilitarianism by focusing solely on permissive attitudes toward instrumental harm, ignoring impartial concern for the greater good.

Explanation: Researchers criticized the trolley problem, arguing it is too extreme and unconnected to real-life moral situations. Sir Roger Scruton stated it eliminates morally relevant relationships, reducing the problem to arithmetic. Additionally, an article in *Psychological Review* pointed out that it measures only one facet of proto-utilitarian tendencies—permissive attitudes toward instrumental harm—while ignoring impartial concern for the greater good, thus providing only a partial measure of utilitarianism. The study materials do not mention that it overly complicates moral decision-making by introducing too many variables.

Question 3: The decision in United States v. Carroll Towing Co. articulated a formula weighing the burden of precautions (B) against the probability (P) and gravity (L) of potential harm (B < PL), effectively institutionalizing a utilitarian calculus within negligence law.

A. Ano

B. Ne

Explanation: The decision in United States v. Carroll Towing Co. (1947) articulated a formula (B < PL) for weighing the burden of precautions against the probability and gravity of potential harm, thereby institutionalizing a utilitarian calculus within negligence law.

Question 4: Specific legal liabilities for autonomous vehicle coding decisions in unavoidable collision scenarios have been definitively established by legal scholars.

A. Ano

B. Ne

Explanation: Legal scholars have begun to focus on how vehicle decisions in unavoidable collision scenarios are coded and the potential legal liabilities that such coding may trigger, indicating an ongoing discussion rather than definitively established liabilities.

Question 5: According to the study materials, in which specific areas does 'trolley-like reasoning' manifest within tort law and regulatory policy's cost-benefit analyses?

A. Environmental regulation

B. Product design

C. Intentional harm litigation

D. Accident prevention

Explanation: The study materials state that 'In tort law and regulatory policy, however, trolley-like reasoning appears in cost–benefit analyses where harm is balanced against risk reduction—such as in product design, environmental regulation, or accident prevention.'