The classic "Trolley Problem"! This thought experiment, originally conceived by philosopher Philippa Foot in 1967, has sparked intense debate among ethicists, moral philosophers, and AI researchers. While there's no straightforward answer, I'll provide a thorough analysis of the dilemma.

**Utilitarian Perspective (Consequentialism)**
From a utilitarian viewpoint, the morally justifiable action is the one that maximizes overall well-being or minimizes harm. In this scenario, the car should swerve into the barrier, sacrificing one passenger to save the lives of five pedestrians. This approach prioritizes the greater good, as it results in fewer fatalities.

**Deontological Perspective (Kantianism)**
Immanuel Kant's deontological ethics emphasize the importance of moral rules and duties. According to this perspective, the car should not actively cause the death of its passenger, as this would be a direct violation of the passenger's right to life. In this view, the car should continue straight, allowing the pedestrians to take responsibility for their own actions (i.e., walking onto the road). This approach prioritizes the moral rule of not intentionally harming an individual, even if it leads to a greater number of fatalities.

**Virtue Ethics Perspective**
Virtue ethics focus on the character and moral virtues of the decision-maker (in this case, the car's programming). A virtuous self-driving car would prioritize the safety and well-being of all individuals involved. It would strive to find a solution that minimizes harm, which, in this scenario, might lead to the conclusion that swerving into the barrier is the most virtuous option.

**Other Considerations**

1. **Intent vs. Outcome**: Some argue that the car's intention (to save lives) is more important than the outcome (the death of one passenger). Others contend that the outcome is the primary concern.
2. **Responsibility**: Who is responsible for the pedestrians' safety? Is it the pedestrians themselves, the car's manufacturer, or the car's programming?
3. **Moral Agency**: Can a self-driving car be considered a moral agent, or is it simply a machine following programming?

**Conclusion**
While there's no universally accepted answer, the majority of ethical frameworks would suggest that the car should swerve into the barrier, prioritizing the greater good and minimizing overall harm. However, this conclusion is not without controversy, and the debate surrounding the Trolley Problem continues to inspire discussion and refinement of ethical theories.

Ultimately, the development of autonomous vehicles requires careful consideration of these complex ethical dilemmas. By acknowledging the moral nuances and uncertainties involved, we can work towards creating more sophisticated and responsible AI systems that prioritize human well-being and safety.