If possible please answer in four to eight sentences.
In 1967 the English philosopher Philippa Foot proposed an ethical problem involving a runaway trolley which – if not interfered with – would barrel down the left fork of a track (where five people would be killed), but if interfered with, would go down the right fork (where one person would be killed). The problem falls on the bystander, who must decide whether or not to interfere. The second version involves a footbridge and a very large man. If one chooses to save five, are the outcomes for both scenarios morally equivalent according to consequentialism? What about Kantian deontology?
