Kill One Man to Save Five? Answers Depend on What Language This Moral Dilemma Is Posed In

It’s a timeworn and some might
say tired rhetorical dilemma: Would you sacrifice one person’s
life to save five? But a new study published in the
journal PLOS One provides a fresh
twist on this morality test. It seems people’s answers may
depend on whether the question is posed in a native or a foreign
language, with people making “substantially more utilitarian”
decisions in the foreign language. 

“People often believe that moral judgments about ‘right’ and
‘wrong’ are the result of deep, thoughtful principles and should
therefore be consistent and unaffected by irrelevant aspects of a
moral dilemma,” note the researchers, led by Albert Costa of
Spain’s University Pompeu Fabra.

Not so! Study participants—a mix of Americans, Koreans, French,
and Israelis—were asked to imagine a situation where pushing a
heavy man off a footbridge in front of a moving train could save
five people about to get hit. The moral dilemma was posed to them
in either their native language or a foreign language that they
were proficient in but did not grow up speaking at home. Across all
groups, more participants selected the utilitarian choice—to save
five people by killing one—when using a foreign language than a
native tongue.

Overall, only 18 percent of participants decided to push the man
to his death when using their native tongue, compared to 44 percent
when using a foreign language. 

In a second experiment, participants were given another version
of the same dillemma—but this time, pulling a switch could
divert the train from hitting five people to only hitting one, no
pushing required. This time, participants preferred to divert the
train in nearly equal numbers using native and foreign
languages. 

The researchers speculate that this has to do with the more
emotional nature of the first scenario. “Most likely, a foreign
language reduces emotional reactivity, promoting cost-benefit
considerations, leading to an increase in utilitarian judgments,”
they write. “This discovery has important consequences for our
globalized world as many individuals make moral judgments in both
native and foreign languages.”