Ologies with Alie Ward: Trolleyology (MORAL DILEMMAS + THE TROLLEY PROBLEM) with Dr. Joshua Greene

Date: August 20, 2025
Host: Alie Ward
Guest: Dr. Joshua Greene, Professor of Psychology, Harvard University

Episode Overview

This episode dives deep into “trolleyology,” the branch of philosophy and neuroscience studying moral dilemmas exemplified by the Trolley Problem. Host Alie Ward interviews Dr. Joshua Greene—an expert on the intersection of philosophy, psychology, and neuroscience—about why we judge some forms of harm as more permissible than others. Their conversation covers the origins of the Trolley Problem, how our brains make moral decisions, the roots of our ethical intuitions, the role of religion and neurodivergence in morality, the challenges of charity, political polarization, and how science can bridge our divides.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Meet the Trolleyologist (06:30–07:12)

• Dr. Joshua Greene introduces himself: Professor at Harvard’s Department of Psychology and Center for Brain Science, pronouns he/him.
• Background: Philosophy undergrad who “never had a form of cool” but was always drawn to fundamental moral questions.

2. The Origin and Evolution of the Trolley Problem (07:13–12:19)

• Personal history: Got into philosophy through debate and childhood questioning—especially religious explanations.
• Early moral dilemmas: “Would it be okay for the doctor to sacrifice one person to save five?” (08:00)
• The classic Trolley Problem: Diverting a trolley to kill one instead of five—most approve.
• Footbridge variant: Pushing one person off a bridge to stop the trolley—most object.

  “This is like the perfect fruit fly for philosophers.” (10:37 – Greene)

• Philosophical lines:
  • Utilitarianism: John Stuart Mill, Jeremy Bentham—right action maximizes happiness for the greatest number.
  • Kantianism: Immanuel Kant—right action is determined by duty and rights, not consequences.

3. Why Our Moral Brains Disagree (12:19–14:47)

• The push/leverage difference in philosophy: Why is switching a lever okay, but pushing someone isn’t?
• Greene’s shift to neuroscience:

  “What is going on there? That turned me from a regular philosopher into an experimental psychologist/neuroscientist.” (12:58)

4. Impact of Philosophy on Society (13:32–14:47)

• Philosophers’ big impact can span animal rights (Peter Singer), bioethics, and beyond.
• Peter Singer’s “Drowning Child” argument:

  “If you have to wade into a pond and ruin your shoes to save a child, why not save children overseas with the price of those shoes?” (16:22 – Greene)

5. Changing Moral Landscape: Effective Altruism (17:42–19:54)

• Movements like veganism and effective altruism are gaining ground, but recent scandals complicate matters.

6. Experimental Philosophy & Moral Neuroscience (19:54–27:44)

• Greene’s breakthrough: fMRI studies on people judging trolley dilemmas.
  • Emotional circuits activate more for “push” scenarios.
• Famous lesion studies:
  • Phineas Gage: Brain injury led to lack of emotional/moral inhibitions (22:08–23:40).
  • Brain-damaged patients more likely to say “push” is okay; different injuries affect judgment in different ways.
• Drugs can alter moral responses (25:21).

Personal Force vs. Intention

• “Pushing” versus “pulling a lever” elicits different judgments.
• Side-effect vs. intention: The Doctrine of Double Effect (Aquinas): “Are you trying to do the thing that’s harmful, or is it a side-effect?”

7. Why Violent Action Triggers Us (27:44–29:53)

• Key elements: Active vs. passive harm, intentionality, and directness.
• We underreact to passive harms (like ignoring distant poverty), overreact to direct ones (like pushing a person).

8. Features and Bugs of Moral Psychology (29:53–33:36)

• Our moral brains evolved for cooperation within small groups (tribes), not for global problems.
• “Bugs” in moral thinking: Overvaluing physical proximity/force, undervaluing distant suffering.
  • Example: “We are not moved by suffering on the other side of the world in the same way we are by a drowning child in front of us.” (31:10 – Greene)

9. How to Do More Good with Charitable Giving (33:36–41:26)

• Most of us want to give locally, but the “most effective” charities (malaria nets, deworming) often have a global, not local, reach.
  • Example: “Training a guide dog in the US: $50,000. Preventing blindness overseas: $100.” (35:04 – Greene)
• Giving Multiplier (38:52):
  • Innovative platform lets you split your donation between a favorite charity and a highly effective global one, with matching funds based on how much goes to the effective cause.
  • Use code OLOGIES for a higher match.

10. Moral Dilemmas and Neurodivergence (60:07–61:29)

• Psychopathy: More likely to okay “pushing” due to lack of emotional response.
• Buddhist monks: Also endorse “pushing” but driven by cultivated compassion for the many.
  • “80% of monks said push the guy off the footbridge.” (61:24 – Greene)
• Different neural and cultural pathways can lead to similar judgments for different reasons.

11. Morality, Religion, and Social Technology (48:54–52:30)

• Religion’s origins: Explains the unknown, creates “big gods” for group cooperation and trust, but also divisions.
  • “Religion makes people more cooperative within the group, but can divide us from others.” (51:12 – Greene)
• Some modern religions strive for inclusivity (e.g., Unitarian Universalism).

12. Nature, Nurture, and the Roots of Morality (53:18–55:49)

• Morality isn’t a single brain “module.”
• Like language, morality is an innate capacity but shaped through experience and culture.

13. AI, Self-Driving Cars, and Trolleyology (56:22–58:54)

• Self-driving cars present real trolley-like choices: How should they weigh passenger vs. pedestrian safety?
  • “There are value judgments being made in training, whether we admit it or not.” (58:54 – Greene)

14. How to Bridge Political Divides: Let’s Tango (72:48–83:15)

• Research shows that pairing political opposites to cooperate on a quiz improves mutual respect and openness.
  • “Gameplay improves democracy-related attitudes and is enjoyable—the effects can last four months from one play.” (80:16–80:31)
• Platform: letstango.org
• Cooperation—not debate or persuasion—is key to reducing polarization.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Early moral crisis:

  “I was this little, little argumentative twerp… and I lost my guiding philosophy.” (08:00 – Greene)

• On why pushing feels different than switching:

  “Here you have the biggest divide in Western moral philosophies…” (10:37 – Greene)

• On the “bug” in our brains:

  “Our brain should not have to waste time mulling over [the difference between pushing and pulling]. That’s a bug.” (30:27 – Ward)

• Peter Singer on AI and humanity:

  “If you have an obligation to wade in and save the child… why don’t you have a comparable obligation to save people nearby or on the other side of the world?” (16:22 – Greene)

• On the “passive” harm in global poverty:

  “We’re letting people die all the time… it doesn’t feel like an act of violence because we’re not going in there and killing them.” (28:34 – Greene)

• Why do effective charity and personal charity?

  “Why don’t you do both?” (36:06 – Greene)

• Fun pop culture moment:

  “My favorite thing about [The Good Place’s trolley episode] is the movie in the background called ‘Bend It Like Bentham.’” (70:06 – Greene)

Listener Questions Highlights

• Religion as moral outsourcing?

  “Religion is a social technology… it binds people together, but often at the cost of making others feel distant.” (51:48 – Greene)

• Nature vs. nurture in morality:

  “Morality is more like language… you’re predisposed to acquire it, but you acquire different flavors.” (54:47 – Greene)

• Political divides and moral intuition:

  “More conservative people are more likely to say it’s wrong to push the guy, but the core tension is the same for everyone.” (71:56–72:48 – Greene)

Timestamps for Important Segments

• 06:30 – Guest introduction
• 08:00 – Early personal connection with moral dilemmas
• 10:37 – Switch case vs. footbridge case explained
• 14:17 – Peter Singer and the drowning child argument
• 21:52 – fMRI studies and brain lesions’ impact on moral judgment
• 35:04 – Charity effectiveness comparison
• 38:52 – Giving Multiplier explainer
• 51:12 – Religion, in-group/out-group morality
• 54:47 – Morality as an acquired capacity akin to language
• 61:24 – Buddhist monks and utilitarian moral response
• 72:48 – Political party and moral decisions
• 75:26–80:31 – Cooperative quiz games reduce polarization

Resources & Calls to Action

• Giving Multiplier: givingmultiplier.org/ologies (use code OLOGIES for a higher match)
• Let’s Tango cooperative quiz: letstango.org
• Dr. Green’s Book: Moral Tribes
• Ologies on Social: @ologies (IG) / ologiesmerch.com
• All show links, further reading, and transcripts in show notes and at alieward.com

Tone & Style

As always, the conversation is brisk, approachable, and funny, with explanations tailored for curious listeners (science lovers to total newbies) and plenty of memorable imagery (banana pants, Miami collars, trapdoors, and monks on footbridges). Dr. Greene’s mix of intellect and humility shines, as does Alie’s signature charm.

Summary for New Listeners

If you’ve ever wondered why we squirm at the thought of sacrificing one to save many, or how our brains and cultures shape our ideas of “right,” this episode offers a vivid, accessible, and sometimes surprisingly hopeful roadmap. From Kant and footbridges to fMRI scans and AI cars, Dr. Greene and Alie Ward cover the science and soul of moral decision-making—and show how understanding our quirks can help us do more good, both individually and as a society.