{Reference Type}: Journal Article
{Title}: The "Bystander at the Switch" Revisited? Ethical Implications of the Government Strategies Against COVID-19.
{Author}: Stelios S;Konstantakis KN;Michaelides PG;
{Journal}: J Bioeth Inq
{Volume}: 0
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 Feb 15
{Factor}: 2.216
{DOI}: 10.1007/s11673-023-10328-6
{Abstract}: Suppose COVID-19 is the runaway tram in the famous moral thought experiment, known as the "Bystander at the Switch." Consider the two differentiated responses of governments around the world to this new threat, namely the option of quarantine/lockdown and herd immunity. Can we contrast the hypothetical with the real scenario? What do the institutional decisions and strategies for dealing with the virus, in the beginning of 2020, signify in a normative moral framework? This paper investigates these possibilities in order to highlight the similarities and, more importantly, the differences that exist between utilitarianism and Kantian ethics. Analysis shows that the hypothetical scenario can never be fully compared to the complex multifactorial nature of the real world. But if a comparison is attempted, the most obvious difference between the two governmental strategies is the concept of duty within the Kantian perspective. Ultimately, it is a matter of comparing freedom and life. Attributing a moral "priority ticket" to one or the other can be analysed through interpersonal aggregation.