Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: 電車難題的哲學探究
A Philosophical Exploration of the Trolley Problem
Authors: 賀龍
He, Long
Contributors: 鄭光明
Keywords: 電車難題
The trolley problem
Doctrine of double effect
Unmanned autopilot
Date: 2020
Issue Date: 2020-09-02 12:04:19 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 電車難題作為一個經典的思想實驗一直被許多專家學者所研究討論,其中效益論和義務論兩個理論的衝突成為電車難題的核心問題,電車難題提出至今未有一個公認合理的答案。而Francis Myrna Kamm、Judith Jarvis Thomson,又是研究電車難題的知名學者,他們對電車難題的發展起到至關重要的作用。
As a classical thought experiment, the trolley problem has been studied and discussed by numerous experts and scholars. Coming up in the conflict between utilitarian theory and deontology, the problem has not yet been answered with a universally accepted sound solution until now. Nevertheless, Francis Myrna Kamm, Judith Jarvis Thomson, the well-known researchers working on the trolley problem, have devoted essential contribution on its growth.
At the beginning, two of Thomson's and one of Kamm's representative articles are introduced in this paper from the origin to the progress of the trolley problem, followed by some distinct opinions and discussions on their certain viewpoints. Hereinto, it is considered that the ideas of Thomson and Kamm could not offer satisfying solutions, since the ethnical choice of trolley problem is affected by many various factors. Thereafter, the doctrine of double effect is interpreted firstly. After that, some issues of Thomas putting forward the trolley problem are discussed, with additional analysis on the drawbacks of the doctrine of double effect and whether it helps with the solution being carried out. Meanwhile, with the staggering steps of the science and technology, the doctrine of double effect theory is expected to be further improved to promote the solution of the trolley problem. Ultimately, based on the trolley problem, the theoretical foundation of future unmanned autopilot technique is discussed in this paper, hoping for providing some referential significance for its advance through the trolley problem. In this paper, it is projected to explain the trolley problem to some extent via comprehensive theories, as well as benefiting its subsequent study.
Reference: 中文文獻
郭蓉、李倫(2014)。〈雙重效應原則及其評析〉,《中南林業科技大學學報(社會科學版)》8(4): 60-63。
劉明娟、廖鳳林(2013)。〈電車難題:情境人數對道德判斷與惻隱之心的影響〉,《首都師範大學學報(自然科學版)》34(2): 82-88。
孫保學(2018)。〈自動駕駛汽車的倫理困境——危急時刻到底該救誰〉,《道德與文明》4: 34-39。
餘露(2019)。〈自動駕駛汽車的羅爾斯式演算法——“最大化最小值”原則能否作為“電車難題”的道德決策原則〉,《哲學動態》10: 100-107。
和鴻鵬(2017)。〈無人駕駛汽車的倫理困境、成因及對策分析〉,《自然辯證法研究》33(11): 58-62。
Huebner, B., & Hauser, M. D. (2011). Moral Judgments about Altruistic Self-sacrifice: When Philosophical and Folk Intuitions Clash. Philosophical Psychology, 24(1): 73-94..
Cathcart, T. (2013). The Trolley Problem, or Would You Throw the Fat Guy Off the Bridge?: A Philosophical Conundrum.New York: Workman Publishing Company.
Cavanaugh,T. A. (2006). Doing Good and Avioding Evil. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Foot, P. (1967). The Problem of Abortion and the Doctrine of the Double Effect. In Virtues and Vices. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1978. Originally appeared in the Oxford Review, 5, 1967.
Kamm, F. M. (2015). The Trolley Problem Mysteries. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Knight, W. (2013). Driverless Cars are Further Away than You Think. MIT Technology Review. Retrieved from http://
Smart, J. J. C. (1973). An Outline of a System of Utilitarian Ethics. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.
Thomson, J. J.. (1985). The Trolley Problem. Yale Law Journal, 94: 1395–1415.
Thomson, J. J. (2008). Turning the Trolley. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 36(4): 359-374.
Description: 碩士
Source URI:
Data Type: thesis
Appears in Collections:[哲學系] 學位論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
401301.pdf1705KbAdobe PDF623View/Open

All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing