Youtube Exercise » English Grammar Homework

B2-C1

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? – Eleanor Nelsen

TED-Ed

5.5M views 9 years ago

Warm-up Questions

From the title, what do you think the main moral question of the video will be?
What situations in real life might force people to choose between saving more people or protecting one person?
Before watching, do you think most people would choose to save five people even if one person dies? Why or why not?

Up Next

Guess the Idioms from Animated Clues | Fun Idiom Quiz for Kids with Meanings & Examples Tutoring Hour
Everything Happens for a Reason | A Powerful Lesson About Patience Streams of Wisdom
Using PPP lessons for teaching English – Intro to ESL Lesson Planning (Part 2) Citizens of Hope
Melania Trump denies Epstein, Maxwell relationship in public statement CNN
Loyalty Isn’t Always Rewarded | Powerful Story About Respect | Emotional Life Lesson Story Tales by Monisha

Start With: Word Definition

Order: Alphabetical Random

…

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? – Eleanor Nelsen

The classic trolley problem and utilitarianism (00:00 – 01:30)

Transcript will load here…

1. In the first scenario, what choice does the switch create?

Slow the trolley down so it misses everyone
Warn the five workers so they can escape
Divert the trolley onto another track where one worker is
Stop the trolley without harming anyone

2. In the survey mentioned, what did about 90% of respondents say was OK?

Calling for help instead of acting
Doing nothing because it is not your responsibility
Sacrificing five to avoid actively causing a death
Flipping the switch so one dies and five live

3. According to utilitarianism in the video, what makes a decision morally correct?

Maximizing well-being for the greatest number of people
Following rules that prohibit causing death
Choosing what feels emotionally easiest
Avoiding any action, because action creates blame

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? – Eleanor Nelsen

The bridge variation: personal harm and emotional conflict (01:30 – 03:31)

Transcript will load here…

1. In the bridge version, what action could stop the trolley and save the five workers?

Flipping a switch to move the trolley to a second track
Pushing a very large man onto the tracks
Turning the trolley by pulling a lever on the bridge
Jumping onto the tracks yourself to block the trolley

2. About how many people say it is OK to throw the man onto the tracks in the bridge case?

About 50%
About 10%
About 90%
About 25%

3. Compared with the classic version, what is stronger in the brain during the bridge version?

No measurable brain differences
Only the visual-processing areas
Only the area for conscious decision-making
The emotional response and activity linked to internal conflict

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? – Eleanor Nelsen

Criticism and real-world relevance (technology and ethics) (03:31 – 04:56)

Transcript will load here…

1. Why do some philosophers and psychologists criticize “trolleyology”?

Because it proves utilitarianism is always wrong
Because it focuses only on women’s responses
Because its premise is unrealistic, so participants may not take it seriously
Because it is too easy to solve logically

2. Which example is given as a future ethical challenge for machines?

A robot teacher choosing which student to help first
A phone deciding what news to show you
A home assistant deciding what music is moral
A driver-less car causing a small accident to prevent a larger one

3. What are researchers in autonomous systems doing, according to the video?

Avoiding philosophers because ethics is subjective
Collaborating with philosophers to program ethics into machines
Trying to remove all emotions from human decision-making
Proving that moral codes are the same in every culture

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? – Eleanor Nelsen

Transcript will load here…

1. What does the trolley problem mainly reveal about human moral judgment?

Most people refuse to make any choice in moral dilemmas
People always follow a single clear moral rule
Feelings and context can strongly change what people think is right
People’s views depend only on logical pros and cons

2. Which statement best summarizes the utilitarian position described in the video?

A decision is moral only if it feels comfortable
Never cause harm intentionally, no matter the outcome
The morally correct choice is the one that produces the most overall well-being
Morality is based only on laws and traditions

3. Why does the video connect trolley dilemmas to modern technology?

Because technology makes accidents impossible
Because autonomous systems may need rules for choosing between harms
Because machines can perfectly copy human emotions
Because virtual reality proves people are always utilitarian

Discussion Questions

Discuss the ideas from this video

Would you sacrifice one person to save five? – Eleanor Nelsen

Do you think flipping the switch and pushing the man are morally the same or different? Explain your reasons.
The video suggests emotion changes moral judgment. Should emotions be trusted in life-and-death decisions? Why or why not?
If a driver-less car must choose between two harmful outcomes, who should decide the rules: engineers, governments, or the public? Why?
Is it possible (or desirable) to “program ethics into machines”? What problems might happen when trying to do this?