Doing vs Allowing

Those that object to redirecting the trolley usually do so on the basis of the doing vs allowing distinction (DAD).  To redirect would implicate one in the killings too directly, involving as it does a direct action - but merely allowing the trolley to cream into the four is just a passive action that doesn’t seem to implicate one in the death of the five.  PDE, on the other hand, demands a redirect.

Pruss offers a modified Trolley case in which the person’s breathing is what causes the trolley to redirect.  Given DAD, it seems that the person should refrain from breathing.  But what’s the purpose of the refraining?  To stop the trolley from hitting the one.  But by refraining one is also keeping the trolley on course to hit the five.  But that seems wrong.  In fact, given DAD, both actions seem wrong.  This thought-experiment seems like it should make us suspicious of DAD.

So, as Robert P. George says somewhere, the key distinction in most morally problematic cases is not DAD but the PDE.  

Further, DAD would also disallow vaccines, as it’s better to allow many to die than to save many by doing an action that results in others’ death.  But that’s a stupid conclusion. Vaccines are clearly permissible.