Skip to main content
Making Sense

#448 — The Philosophy of Good and Evil

24 min episode · 2 min read
·
David Edmonds

Episode

24 min

Read time

2 min

Topics

Software Development, Psychology & Behavior, Philosophy & Wisdom

AI-Generated Summary

Key Takeaways

  • Trolley Problem Asymmetry: 95% approve flipping a switch to divert a train killing one to save five, but 95% oppose pushing someone to achieve identical outcomes, revealing non-consequentialist intuitions about using people as means versus side effects.
  • Doctrine of Double Effect: The moral distinction between intending harm versus foreseeing it as collateral damage explains why targeting civilians differs from bombing munitions factories that kill civilians, tracing back to Thomas Aquinas's framework for evaluating actions.
  • Comprehensive Consequentialism: Apparent defeaters of consequentialism like the organ harvesting scenario fail when considering full consequences including psychological trauma, societal trust erosion, and terror of living where doctors murder patients, making narrow body-count analyses insufficient.
  • Speed Limit Paradox: Reducing speed limits by 10 mph would save thousands of the 40,000 annual US traffic deaths, yet society accepts this preventable carnage for driving convenience, demonstrating moral inconsistency around identifiable versus statistical victims.

What It Covers

Sam Harris and philosopher David Edmonds explore Peter Singer's drowning child thought experiment, examining consequentialism versus deontological ethics through the trolley problem and effective altruism's philosophical foundations in moral decision-making.

Key Questions Answered

  • Trolley Problem Asymmetry: 95% approve flipping a switch to divert a train killing one to save five, but 95% oppose pushing someone to achieve identical outcomes, revealing non-consequentialist intuitions about using people as means versus side effects.
  • Doctrine of Double Effect: The moral distinction between intending harm versus foreseeing it as collateral damage explains why targeting civilians differs from bombing munitions factories that kill civilians, tracing back to Thomas Aquinas's framework for evaluating actions.
  • Comprehensive Consequentialism: Apparent defeaters of consequentialism like the organ harvesting scenario fail when considering full consequences including psychological trauma, societal trust erosion, and terror of living where doctors murder patients, making narrow body-count analyses insufficient.
  • Speed Limit Paradox: Reducing speed limits by 10 mph would save thousands of the 40,000 annual US traffic deaths, yet society accepts this preventable carnage for driving convenience, demonstrating moral inconsistency around identifiable versus statistical victims.

Notable Moment

Harris challenges whether pushing someone through a trapdoor versus directly differs morally, arguing both manipulate the person as instrument rather than train, while Edmonds counters this remains non-consequentialist intuition requiring explanation beyond emotional proximity.

Know someone who'd find this useful?

Episode Transcript

Welcome to the Making Sense podcast. This is Sam Harris. Just a note to say that if you're hearing this, you're not currently on our subscriber feed and will only be hearing the first part of this conversation. In order to access full episodes of the Making Sense podcast, you'll need to subscribe at samharris.org. We don't run ads on the podcast, and therefore it's made possible entirely through the support of our subscribers, so if you enjoy what we're doing here, please consider becoming one. I am here with David Edmonds. David, thanks for joining me again. Thanks for having me back. So, David, you have a new book, which I I really enjoyed. It's titled Death in a Shallow Pond, a Philosopher, a Drowning Child, and Strangers in Need. And, you've written a kind of a short bio of, the philosopher Peter Singer, who's also been on the podcast several times and of the effective altruism movement that he has spawned along with, Will McCaskill and Toby Ord, who've also been on the podcast several times. And but it's also a great history of moral philosophy in the analytic tradition. So I I I just wanna track through the book really because it's I I think the, the virtues of effective altruism as well as its, the concerns surrounding it are are still worth talking about. And I think just the the core concerns of moral philosophy and how we think about doing good in the world are are really, of a, eternal interest because it's not at all clear that we think about these things rationally or effectively or normatively in any other way. So but before we jump in, remind people what you do. You you because I you you and I have spoken before, and you have your own podcast. But, you know, where can people find your work generally, and and what are you tending to focus on these days? Gosh. Well, I had a double life as a BBC journalist and a philosopher. I've given up the BBC bit, so it's all philosophy from now on. Nice. I've got a podcast called Philosophy Bites, which I make with a colleague, a friend called Nigel Warburton. And, yeah, now I write philosophy books. And I'm linked to a center in Oxford called the UHERO Institute, Institute, which is a center dedicated to the study of practical ethics, applied ethics. So, yeah, those are the various strings to my bow. So why did you write this book? How why and why did you take the the angle you took here? Oh, gosh. I mean, there's some prosaic explanations for why I wrote the book. I just written this biography of a guy called Derek Parfit, who, as it happens, Peter Singer says is the only genius he ever met. And so I was thinking, I had such fun writing that book, and he was such an extraordinary character. Mhmm. I thought maybe I'll have a …

Get the full transcript (4,500 words) + summary by email — free

One-time email with the complete transcript and AI summary of this episode. No account needed.

One email, no spam. We’ll also show you what SignalCast does.

Browse all Making Sense transcripts →

You just read a 3-minute summary of a 21-minute episode.

Get Making Sense summarized like this every Monday — plus up to 2 more podcasts, free.

Pick Your Podcasts — Free

Keep Reading

More from Making Sense

We summarize every new episode. Want them in your inbox?

Similar Episodes

Related episodes from other podcasts

Explore Related Topics

This podcast is featured in Best Philosophy Podcasts (2026) — ranked and reviewed with AI summaries.

Read this week's Software Engineering Podcast Insights — cross-podcast analysis updated weekly.

You're clearly into Making Sense.

Every Monday, we deliver AI summaries of the latest episodes from Making Sense and 192+ other podcasts. Free for one show.

Start My Monday Digest

No credit card · Unsubscribe anytime