I’m working on a ethnic studies discussion question and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.

Now that we are familiar with consequentialism, its core moral/ethical imperative to “Always do the best for the most!”, its values/disvalues, etc., we can consider an interesting set of questions.

1) Should driverless cars be programmed to be consequentialists when confronted with trolley-style problems/decisions?  If so, why so?  If not, why not?

Alternatively stated, does it seem like a good idea to program a driverless car to tally up the potential positive and negative consequences of its possible actions and then to always select whichever action stands the statistically best chance of resulting in the most positive consequences/results for the greatest number of people effected/affected by its actions?  Or might it be a better idea to program driverless cars to always choose actions that are most likely to protect/save its driver/passengers, even when such might result in greater overall harm, suffering, death, etc., to the majority of effected/affected people outside of the car? Your reasons?

2)  If you tend to agree with the idea of programming driverless cars to calculate like consequentialists, then which of consequentialism’s assumptions and values/disvalues do you tend to find especially appealing? Your reasons?  

If you tend to disagree with the idea of programming driverless cars to calculate like consequentialists, then which of consequentialism’s assumptions and values/disvalues do you tend to find especially unappealing?  Your reasons?

Also, if you tend to think that programming cars to calculate like consequentialists is a bad idea, then what might be a better idea?  That is, what should driverless cars be programmed to do when confronted with trolley-style problems/decisions?  What values/disvalues should be given the greatest priority in such scenarios?  Your reasons?