Summary
Gregor Samsa awakens to discover he has transformed into a giant insect. As he grapples with his new physical condition, his thoughts remain focused on work and supporting his family. His inability to communicate and his grotesque appearance alarm his family and employer when they enter his room.

Key Events

1. Gregor's Transformation

   • Gregor wakes up to find himself transformed into a giant insect. He struggles with his new body and wonders how he can go to work in this state.

2. The chief clerk's Arrival

   • Gregor’s manager comes to his home, frustrated that Gregor is late for work.

3. Gregor’s Attempts to Communicate

   • Gregor tries to speak but can only produce unintelligible sounds, further alarming everyone.

4. The Family's Horror

   • Gregor reveals himself by unlocking the door, causing his family and the manager to recoil in fear. His father forces him back into his room with a stick and newspaper.

Summary
Gregor becomes confined to his room as his family begins to adjust to his condition. His sister, Grete, takes on the responsibility of feeding him, while the family grapples with financial difficulties. Tensions grow as Gregor’s presence becomes a burden.

Key Events

1. Grete’s Care

   • Grete brings Gregor food, experimenting to find what he can eat. She takes on the role of his caretaker, showing compassion at first.

2. Family Financial Troubles

   • The Samsa family realizes they are in dire financial straits now that Gregor cannot work. They begin looking for ways to sustain themselves.

3. Gregor’s Growing Isolation

   • Gregor becomes increasingly aware of his alienation. His family avoids him, and his room becomes cluttered and neglected.

4. Furniture Removal

   • Grete and Gregor’s mother remove furniture from his room to give him more space, but this act makes Gregor feel like he is losing his connection to humanity.

5. Mother’s Fainting Incident

   • Gregor’s appearance frightens his mother during the furniture removal. His father interprets this as Gregor being aggressive and injures him by throwing an apple into his back.

Today's core question: Are morals simply determined by outcomes alone or determined varying on the manner in which you achieve the outcome? 

Lexicon #19: Morals are personal principles of right and wrong shaped by culture, upbringing, and individual beliefs.

Lexicon #20: Ethics are systematic rules or guidelines for behavior, often established by a group, profession, or society.

In essence, morals are personal; ethics are collective.

This activity is a treatment of some of the issues thrown up by a thought experiment called “The Trolley Problem,” which was first outlined by the philosopher Philippa Foot, and then developed by Judith Jarvis Thomson and others. But before we start properly, we need to ask you four preliminary questions, so we get a sense of the way that you think about morality. There are no right or wrong answers. Just select the option that most corresponds to your view.

The brakes of the train that Casey Jones is driving have just failed. There are five people on the track ahead of the train. There is no way that they can get off the track before the train hits them. The track has a siding leading off to the right, and Casey can hit a button to direct the train onto it. Unfortunately, there is one person stuck on the siding. Casey can turn the train, killing one person; or he can allow the train to continue onwards, killing five people.

Should he turn the train (1 dead); or should he allow it to keep going (5 dead)?

Do you turn the train or allow the train to keep going?

Marty Bakerman is on a footbridge above the train tracks. He can see that the train approaching the bridge is out of control, and that it is going to hit five people who are stuck on the track just past the bridge. The only way to stop the train is to drop a heavy weight into its path. The only available heavy enough weight is a (very) fat man, who is also watching the train from the footbridge. Marty can push the fat man onto the track into the path of the train, which will kill him but save the five people already on the track; or he can allow the train to continue on its way, which will mean that the five will die.

Should he push the fat man onto the track (1 dead); or allow the train to continue (5 dead)?

Do you push the fat man onto the track or allow the train to keep going?

Okay so this scenario is identical to the preceding scenario but with one crucial difference. This time Marty Bakerman knows with absolute certainty that the fat man on the bridge is responsible for the failure the train's brakes: upset by train fare increases, he sabotaged the brakes with the intention of causing an accident. As before, the only way to stop the train and save the lives of the five people already on the track is to push the fat saboteur off the bridge into the path of the train.

Should Marty push the fat saboteur onto the track (1 dead); or allow the train to continue (5 dead)?

Do you push the fat man onto the track or allow the train to keep going?

The fat man, having avoided being thrown in front of the runaway train, has been arrested, and is now in police custody. He states that he has hidden a nuclear device in a major urban center, which has been primed to explode in 24 hours’ time. The following things are true:

1. The bomb will explode in 24 hours’ time.

2. It will kill a million people if it explodes.

3. If bomb disposal experts get to the bomb before it explodes, there’s a chance it could be defused.

4. The fat man cannot be tricked into revealing the location of the bomb, nor is it possible to appeal to his better nature, nor is it possible to persuade him that he was wrong to plant the bomb in the first place.

5. If the fat man is tortured, then it is estimated there is a 75% chance that he will give up the bomb’s location.

6. If the fat man does not reveal the location, the bomb will explode, and a million people will die: there is no other way of finding out where the bomb is located.

Should the fat man be tortured in the hope that he will reveal the location of the nuclear device?

Do you torture the fat man or not?

It is often thought to be a good thing if one's moral choices are governed by a small number of consistently applied moral principles. If this is not the case, then there is the worry that moral choices are essentially arbitrary - just a matter of intuition or making it up as you go along. Suppose, for example, you think it is justified to divert the train in the first scenario simply because it is the best way to maximize human happiness, but you do not think this justification applies in the case of the fat man on the bridge. The problem here is that unless you're able to identify morally relevant differences between the two scenarios, then it isn't clear what role the justification plays in the first case. Put simply, it seems that the justification is neither necessary nor sufficient for the moral judgement that it is right to divert the train. Overall, “The Trolley Problem” seeks to answer whether we are moved by our morals based on simple outcomes or the manner in which one achieves the outcome.