A Moral Dilemma

One of my friends recently forwarded to me an interesting mail, which in a striking fashion highlighted the conflicts we face when we make decisions that involve other people. I have made it the anchor of this post.

The story is as follows. A group of children was playing near a two line railway tracks; one still in use while the other not used. Only one child played on the disused track, the rest on the operational track.

The train is coming, and you are just beside the track interchange. You can make the train change its course to the disused track and save most of the kids. However, that would also mean the lone child playing by the disused track would be sacrificed. Or would you rather let the train go its way?

Let's take a pause to think what kind of decision we could make...

Most people might choose to divert the course of the train, and sacrifice only one child. You might think the same way, I guess. To save most of the children at the expense of only one child is the rational decision most people would make, morally and emotionally. But, have you ever thought that the child who chose to play on the disused track had in fact made the right decision to play at a safe place?

Nevertheless, he had to be sacrificed because of his ignorant friends who chose to play where the danger was. This kind of dilemma happens around us every day. In the office, community, in politics and especially in a democratic society where the minority is often sacrificed for the interest of the majority, no matter how foolish or ignorant the majority are, and how farsighted and knowledgeable the minority are. The child who chose not to play with the rest on the operational track was sidelined. And in the case he was sacrificed, no one would shed a tear for him.

The great critic Leo Velski Julian who told the story said he would not try to change the course of the train because he believed that the kids playing on the operational track should have known very well that track was still in use, and that they should have run away when they heard the train's siren. If the train was diverted, that lone child would definitely die because he never thought the train could come over to that track! Moreover, that track was not in use probably because it was not safe. If the train was diverted to the track, we could put the lives of all passengers on board at stake! And in your attempt to save a few kids by sacrificing one child, you might end up sacrificing hundreds of people to save these few kids.

We face such situations very often in our life. The options may not be as striking as in the above story; but could be as conflicting.

Last week my wife was walking out of her office and at the junction there was an assembly of people waiting to listen to a political leader. There were many chairs kept at the side of the road. The speaker of the day welcomed all those who were walking along and requested them to take the chairs, place them on the road and sit down comfortably. He pointed out that even if it blocked the road, it was OK or rather better as it demonstrated his party’s strength.

Such behaviour with little regard to the society at large has become an acceptable practice today. These are social dilemmas that have no technical solution other than the value system that generally drives a significant majority. Building mechanisms that enables social audits and transparency in public administration would go a long way in supporting this.

However to build and sustain such a society we need to build healthy values right from childhood. Our education system will have to incorporate such value education a more important component of the syllabus. In addition to making this a part of the syllabus we also will have to develop imaginative ways of inculcating this in the young minds. But then that is the challenge our education system faces in all streams of education and which needs our top attention