This solution is essentially an application of the doctrine of double effectwhich says that you may take action which has bad side effects, but deliberately intending harm even for good causes is wrong.
The trolley problem, by the way, also encourages people to be confident that they can predict outcomes, setting aside the uncertainty that characterizes all actual tough decision-making.
To make the parallel as close as possible it may rather be supposed that he is the driver of a runaway tram which he Trolley problem only steer from one narrow track on to another; five men are working on one track and one man on the other; anyone on the track he enters is bound to be killed.
Criticism[ edit ] In a paper published in the Social and Personality Psychology Compass,  researchers criticized the use of the trolley problem, arguing, among other things, that the scenario it presents is too extreme and unconnected to real-life moral situations to be useful or educational.
Beside this example is placed another in which a pilot whose airplane is about to crash is deciding whether to steer from a more to a less inhabited area. Since then, numerous other studies have employed trolley problems to study moral judgment, investigating topics like the role and influence of stress,  emotional state,  impression management,  levels of anonymity,  different types of brain damage,  physiological arousal,  different neurotransmitters,  and genetic factors  on responses to trolley dilemmas.
This is one of his examples: As before, a trolley is hurtling down a track towards five people. Treating others as individuals with their own rights, wishes and needs, rather than simply objects to be used at will, is a key aspect of being a good social partner.
This view says that morality is defined by the consequences of an action, and that the consequences are all that matter.