The "Trolley Problem" was also discussed and discussed in the Harvard Open Class. In terms of the theory of moral responsibility, it is believed that all living beings are equal, and that one person's life is equal to the lives of 80 people. At the consequential level, it measures that the lower the loss, the better.
When discussing it only as a question, we are often prone to take the side of moral responsibility, but in practice, people's choices are always inclined to the consequential theory that the smaller the damage value, the better. Because the operating principle of this world is that everything has value, and the value is big or small, people will try their best to make the most valuable choices within their own abilities and judgment standards, although not every choice is obtained. The results are the best, but it still does not affect people who will make the same choice in the future.
In the film, there is a sentence when the general leaves at the end: Don't tell a soldier that he doesn't know the cost of war.
This sentence reminds me of a sentence in a certain book: The duty of a soldier, really, is either to kill or to be killed.
How would you choose when faced with either killing or being killed by others? Do you still think about the question of moral responsibility?
This looks a bit cruel, but since you are faced with a choice, how can it not be cruel?
What we can do is to use lies and a little action to make up for the trauma and comfort ourselves after choosing. The big guys in the film did just that, so it went back to a famous quote from Aeschylus at the beginning of the film: In war, the truth is the first casualty.
View more about Eye in the Sky reviews
