system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Being an ethical person, would you take an unethical action with unknown consequences or would you take an inaction with known bad consequences?

I’ll rephrase my question in the form of a trolley problem: say there’s five people tied to a trolley track. You have a lever that you can pull to redirect the trolley onto another track. However, the second track is hidden from your view, and it either has zero people, five, ten, or twenty, in even chances. If you remain inactive and don’t pull the lever, five people will die. If you do pull the lever, there is a small chance that nobody dies, but a good chance that more people die overall.

Does the chance of a better outcome through action outweigh the probable chance of a worse outcome?
gpt
This formulation begs the question. The very issue with these cases is which action(s), if any, are morally permitted/forbidden/required. To call one of them "unethical" loads the dice, and does so contentiously. It's also a little leading to suggest that the other option is "inaction"; we could easily describe the other option as choosing to not pull the lever.