This note is sparked by discussion of this supposed “diversity training”.
I think using contrived examples to test human morality is meaningless. There are basically no external validity of what is being discussed and what an actual problem is, and such discussion are often served as red herring. It is also concerning how easy it is to get Social Darwinism conclusion from those discussion and then use them to justify real-world behavior.
Now I do think sacrificial dilemmas is entertaining to watch in shows and anime, but they should not be used in day-to-day discussion or as justification of anything.
There are psychologists who share the same kind of concern too.