reverie Posted November 12, 2007 Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 (edited) 11/12/2007 With Friends Picture five people tied to a track, and just before these unfortunate, on an opposing rail, lies another person likewise construed. At this moment, a trolley likely will crush the light out of these five unless someone switches the rail from a near distant tower which you just happen to be imagined upon, too far to do anything, but watch and or shift the switch from the several innocent lives awaiting their fate to another waiting as innocently below. The trolley dilemma tells me much about my friends. It tells me just how different I am from them. For in our group, I alone choose to let the car ride on as the thought- experiment intended. Who am I to take the life of one for the sake of many? And my friends answer, Well, who are we not to save the lives of five over one? This bothers me for a while. No one seems to see why I decry their thoughtfully considered utilitarianism. Given the same problem with a slightly different turn where you must push a fat man out of a car to save your own life as well as everyone else aboard. Again, I stand alone in choosing to let the game play out without my hand saving what might as well be the whole world through the extinguishing of one an inconvenient life. And I am not so sure why I see it differently than my friends, until I remember just how justified the explanations for the dropping of another Fat Man over the crowded lights of a far away Japan seemed to a much younger version of myself safely tucked behind the dissociating veil of a history I did not have to live through. Now I am older and have been taught a little of what it is to kill, and I am ashamed that I would ever think it right to save the lives of any number over a single person killed in an act of cold blood. Edited November 12, 2007 by reverie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reverie Posted November 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 12, 2007 (edited) 11/12/2007 Second draft: * minor changes to the ending and line breaks of last stanza * exchange "light" for "life" in 3rd line of 2nd stanza * exchanged "five" for "many" in last line of 3rd stanza and trimmed it up some * played with line breaks in 2nd and 3rd stanza * put more emphasis on "ride on" via line break in 8th line of 3rd stanza * 2nd stanza line 13, exchange "switch" for "certain doom" With Friends Picture five people tied to a track, and just before these unfortunate, on an opposing rail, lies another person likewise construed. At this moment, a trolley likely will crush the life out of these five unless someone switches the rail from a near distant tower, which you just happen to be imagined upon, too far to do anything, but watch and or shift a certain doom from the several innocent lives awaiting their fate to another waiting as innocently below. The trolley dilemma tells me much about my friends. It tells me just how different I am from them. For in our group, I alone choose to let the car ride on as the thought- experiment intended. Who am I to take the life of one for the sake of many? I say. And my friends answer, Well, who are we not to save the many over one? This bothers me for a while. No one seems to see why I decry their thoughtfully considered utilitarianism. Given the same problem with a slightly different turn where you must push a fat man out of a car to save your own life as well as everyone else aboard. Again, I stand alone in choosing to let the game play out without my hand saving what might as well be the whole world through the extinguishing of one inconvenient life. And I am not so sure why I see it differently from my friends, until I remember how justified the explanations for the dropping of another Fat Man over the crowded lights of a far away Japan seemed to a much younger version of myself safely tucked behind the dissociating veil of a history I did not have to live through. Now I am older and have been taught a little of what it is to kill, and I am ashamed that I would ever think it right to save the lives of any number over a single person killed in an act of coolly calculated blood. Edited November 12, 2007 by reverie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reverie Posted November 13, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 13, 2007 (edited) Third draft: 11/12/2007 *changed lots, too tired to list. With Friends Picture five people tied to a track, and just before these unfortunate, on an opposing rail, lies another person likewise construed. At this moment, a trolley will likely crush the life out of these five folk unless someone switches the rail from a near distant tower, which you just happen to be imagined upon, too far to do anything, but watch and or hit the control that will lock the switching rails onto the diverging track thus, shifting the fate away from those five innocent lives to another waiting as innocently below. The trolley dilemma tells me much about my friends. It tells me just how different I am from them. For in our group, I alone choose to let the car ride on as the thought- experiment intended. Who am I to take the life of one for the sake of many? I say. And my friends answer, Well, who are we not to save the lives of many over the life of just one? This bothers me for a while. No one seems to see why I decry their thoroughly considered utilitarianism. Given the same problem with a slightly different turn where you must push a fat man out of a car to save your own life as well as everyone else aboard. Again, I stand alone in choosing to let the game play out without my hand saving what might as well be the whole world through the extinguishing of one inconvenient life. And I am not so sure why I see it differently from my friends, until I remember how justified the explanation for dropping another Fat Man over the crowded lights of a far away Japan seemed to a much younger version of myself, safely tucked behind the dissociating veil of a history that was not mine to live through. Now, I am older and have been taught a little of what it is to kill, and I am ashamed that I would ever think it right to save the lives of any number pro a single person killed in a calculated wreck of cold blood. Edited November 14, 2007 by reverie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da_Yog Posted November 14, 2007 Report Share Posted November 14, 2007 This reminds me a lot of "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau except applied not to government but to the taking of life. If one person should object then we have an imperfect system and it is the duty of all, not only to disagree, but to disrupt. It really seems like stanza three could be shorter and still carry the message forward. It's just my opinion, but I think you could start stanza three here: "in our group, I alone choose to let the car ride on as the thought- experiment intended. Who am I to take the life of one for the sake of many? I say. And my friends answer, Well, who are we not to save the lives of many over the life of just one?" Perhaps take a look at tightening up stanza two as well. That being said, I thought the last two stanzas were very thought provoking. The transition from a fat man on a subway to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was nicely done. These two stanzas clearly shine for me. It was just a little difficult getting there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reverie Posted November 14, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 14, 2007 (edited) This reminds me a lot of "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" by Thoreau except applied not to government but to the taking of life. If one person should object then we have an imperfect system and it is the duty of all, not only to disagree, but to disrupt. Hmm, will have to find time to read this. Sound interesting. On that note, I was communing with about 15 of my fellow Unitarians-Universalists, and we're supposed to be the peacenik hippie types of organized religion. At any rate, I felt a little weird being the only one that choose to save the one over the five. I've asked other ppl about the problem too and apparently I'm the weird outlier that throws off everyone statistics. As far as tightening up the third stanza. I think I needed those lines to pull off the tone shift. It's a point of reflection after the dry explanation of the problem. Well at least I need to name the thought-experiment so I don't get accused of plagiarism. Will give it some more thought. That being said, I thought the last two stanzas were very thought provoking. The transition from a fat man on a subway to the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was nicely done. These two stanzas clearly shine for me. It was just a little difficult getting there. Yeah, agree last two stanza really start singing. First two are a little dry, but needed to lay it all out so the rest makes sense. One friend suggested I condense it down to a logic problem with x and y nomenclature, but I'm not really up on that stuff and wouldn't know where to start. It's a problem. Still it may play to my advantage. Dry Detachment changing into emotional plea, that sort of thing. Fourth stanza bothers me the most. The Language doesn't seem to mesh as well with the rest of the poem. The sentiments are right enough I think. I can't believe I used the word "decry" ick. thanks, rev... Edited November 14, 2007 by reverie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Da_Yog Posted November 14, 2007 Report Share Posted November 14, 2007 You can get a free transcript of Thoreau's "On the Duty of Civil Disobedience" here Project Gutenberg. Just do a search for Thoruea and it should pop up. Great site by the way. I think 1700 books that have their copyright expired can be found there. One thought that occured to me in the last couple of hours is that this reads a lot like a personal essay in poetic format. You might think about reworking it in that format. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reverie Posted November 15, 2007 Author Report Share Posted November 15, 2007 Yeah I get the whole you should try your hand at prose a lot. I will someday. I hear it so much I think it's probably my destiny to write prose, but for now I'm try to work it all out in verse. Might pay off in the long run creatively, but we'll see. rev... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts