@article{oai:chuo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp:00013928,
 author = {平野, 晋},
 journal = {国際情報学研究},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {application/pdf, Many people seem to hesitate to accept absolute deontology which strictly prohibits balancing one life with two or five lives（like Judice Thomson's Bystander at the Switch）or even a hundred or a thousand of lives even in an extreme dilemma situation like the one where hijacked civil aircrafts were used as missiles against targets on the ground such as the World Trade Center,Pentagon,White House,or U.S.Capital.Nonetheless,Germany's Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure,Report,Ethics Commission Automated and Connected Driving,June 2017 seems to follow such absolute deontology.The lecturer herein compares such a position taken by the absolute deontologist with some hypotheticals（e.g.,Mountaineer Case,The Nazi Holocaust Case,and other foreseeable/collateral－effects cases）in which sacrifice of a life or some lives to save more lives seems to be justified.Many of these hypotheticals are taken from the necessity doctrine,especially the so－called"choice of the evils"in the MODEL PENAL CODE in the U.S.},
 pages = {53--76},
 title = {〔講義〕自動運転に於ける派生型トロッコ問題の仮想事例研究――9・11 同時多発テロで撃墜を命じられたユナイテッド航空93 便事件と，ハイジャック旅客機撃墜を命じ得る『ドイツ連邦航空安全法』と，その違憲判決に依拠した2017 年_ドイツ連邦_交通及びデジタルインフラ省_倫理委員会_自動協調型運転_報告の問題点：なぜ多くの人々に受け入れられないのか？――},
 volume = {2},
 year = {2022},
 yomi = {ヒラノ, ススム}
}