A PEACOCK'S TALE

The ring, the trolley and the ballot box

Imagine, if you can, that you've been transported back thousands of years to ancient Greece.

You are wondering among the beautiful green hillsides guarding a flock of sheep, when you stumble upon a cave opened up by a recent earthquake.

Curious, you take a cautious look inside and find the cave is actually a long forgotten tomb and there, lying in front of you, an ancient corpse wearing a dazzling and captivating gold ring.

You take the gold ring, and cover the entrance to the cave and carry on with your day. You quickly discover however, that the ring is no ordinary ring and that by adjusting it on your hand you have the power to make yourself invisible. How would it change your life? In the original story, the finder uses the ring's power to gain a kingdom. What would you do? Given that you have the power to walk amongst men and act in a God like fashion without being detected, the choices, would be many and far from easy.

Now, transport yourself forward to the present day and imagine that you are standing quietly by a railway line; in the distance you notice a runaway trolley heading in your direction. You immediately look down the line to where the trolley is heading and see group of five people working on the line who will surely be killed if they are hit by the trolley. You notice in front of you is a lever that controls a fork in the track and if you pull that leaver you change the course of the trolley away from the five. Unfortunately however, you notice that there is still one worker on the alternative track who's life will also be in peril. It's your choice, do nothing and five lives will be lost, but if you pull the lever one life will be lost and five would be spared. For most it's a no brainer … it's better to save five than one.

Does this seem easy to you? A hard choice maybe, but justifiable in terms saving human life.

Would think differently though, if instead of standing by the railway line, you are standing on a bridge over the tracks and next to you is standing a Fat man. Instead of pulling the lever to save the five people, you have to push the Fat man off the bridge into the path of the oncoming trolley in order to save the lives of the five people. The figures are the same, do nothing and five lives will be lost but by 'sacrificing' the life of one, the Fat man, …..five lives will be spared. Still a no brainer?

Most people find this much more difficult and there seems to be much more reluctance to do this. Pulling a lever is one thing, physical contact another.

The reluctance drops however, if you are shown a picture of the Fat man or told that he is a criminal. We are it seems, much more willing to take the responsibility of pushing someone to their deaths in these circumstances and some how feel more justified.

Given that you have difficult choices to make would it be easier if you were invisible, if you had the shepherd's ring?

It is arguably said morality is a social construct with it's driving force being that of maintaining your reputation for trust, judgment, justice, humanity etc.

Therefore, if you could protect your reputation with a cloak of invisibility, would it make those difficult choices easier?

Well, we do have a cloak of invisibility that we step into every five years. It's called a Voting booth where we cast our votes in secrecy before placing them in the ballot box.

Just like standing by the railway line or standing on the bridge, we have difficult choices to make and it's not easy for a lot of people.

What we do know, is that in a situation where people have any doubt it is quiet easy to manipulate their decision making. Were we 'shown pictures' of the fat man and told he is responsible for ruining our country? Were we told he was 'criminal' ?

The press at the last election had a field day, all they had to was wind 'em up and point 'em in the direction of the magic booth and the work was done. The people even thought that when left the polling booth, their morality was preserved, or even fortified by having to be the one who made the awkward decision.

The last election took everyone by surprise, not to mention the myriad of opinion polls that were predicting a neck and neck race. Did they get it wrong? To be fair, they only processed the information that they collected. It's obvious that opinions between the telephone and the polling booth were very different. The cloak of secrecy make it much easier;

The truth is though, there never was a runaway train and no 'Fat man' or any other sector of society or public service that had to sacrificed in order the benefit the majority. A minority, perhaps.

It was just a choice between different courses and a different choice of political philosophies, but once you've planted that seed, it grows well in a climate of austerity doesn't it?

And the power of the ring? Socrates argued that he who abused the power or used it foolishly, ultimately becomes a slave to his appetites. That couldn't happen today….. could it?