But, carefully analysing the situation would give you a different perspective.The child who was playing on the unused track made the right decision. He sacrificed the company of his friends and was sensible enough to use the unused track.
Nevertheless, we think he has to be sacrificed because of his ignorant friends who chose to play where the danger was. This kind of dilemma happens around us everyday. In the office, community, in politics and especially in a democratic society, the minority is often sacrificed for the interest of the majority, no matter how foolish or ignorant the majority are, and how farsighted and knowledgeable the minority is. The child who chose not to play with the rest on the operational track was sidelined. And in this case he is sacrificed, and no one would feel they have morally wronged.
The great critic Leo Velski Julian who told the story said he would not change the course of the train because he believed that the kids playing on the operational track should have known very well that the track was still in use, and that they should have run away if they heard the train speeding towards them. If the train was diverted, that lone child would definitely die because he never thought the train could come his way! Moreover, that track was not in use probably because it was not safe and probably because it was under maintenance. If the train was diverted to the unused track, we could put the lives of all passengers on board at stake! And in our attempt to save a few kids by sacrificing one child, we might be sacrificing hundreds of people to save those few kids.
While we are all aware that life is full of tough decisions that need to be made, we may not realize that hasty decisions may not always be the right.