Questions and Topics We Can Help You To Answer:
Paper Instructions:

Foot examines two cases (i.e. “driver” and “transplant”) in which death will come to 

either one person or five people (but not both). Foot’s argues that we are justified in 

arriving at different conclusions about what is permissible in these two cases by 

appeal to two different (but consistent) general principles. Foot argues that it is 

impermissible for the surgeon to kill one healthy patient in order to save five dying 

patients (i.e. the “transplant” case) because “killing one is worse than letting five die.”

Thomson argues against Foot’s explanation of the impermissibility in “transplant” by 

introducing a third case—the “bystander” case. Carefully explain how the “bystander”

case challenges Foot’s explanation of the “transplant” case. Do you agree with 

Thomson that killing one person to save five people is permissible? Critically discuss; 

defend your position and consider possible responses to your argument.