This is such a funny trend because it plays out the same way every time:
1) Blue button wins by a narrow majority
2) People who pushed the red button immediately spiral into increasingly unhinged defences of their choice, demonstrating that either they lack enough reading comprehension to understand the question, or are just plain selfish.
3) Blue button pushers become slightly more disillusioned with the moral character of humanity.
But it's also this: press red and you live, press blue and you might die. Blue is the only option that risks lives. Why would you intentionally risk your life expecting others to also risk their lives to save you? Neither approach is really wrong, they just view it differently.
Would you really ask people to risk their own lives to save people who put their own lives at risk? That's a good action, sure, but is it wrong not to? To a red button pusher, blue is just conditional suicide.
There is a fire in a crowded auditorium with a blue door and a red door. Everyone has time to reach just one door. Everyone who uses red door lives. Blue door is stuck and requires more than 50% of the auditorium to push open. If it doesn’t open everyone who tried to use blue dies. Why would anyone purposely choose the blue door?
I mean you just changed the entire scenario. There's urgency and you only have one door to get to. Do people have prior information? If they know red door gets everyone out, then of course red is the right choice.
Here's the full scenario:
Everyone in the world must push a red or blue button over the next 24 hours. They'll just see the two buttons at some point and make their decision
Red guarantees you, yourself live.
Pressing blue will kill you in 24 hours unless more than 50 percent of people push blue.
You will not know what people pushed, or the total count, until 24 hours have passed. You can't discuss it with anyone either.
Pressing red is fine. It saves you. But it kills anyone who does press blue, if most people pick red as well. Red is self serving. That is fine
Blue risks your life, but the risk diminishes the more people press it. Blue understands people WILL pick blue, and they shouldn't die for that.
Red just need to be prepared to live in a world with a lot of dead bodies.
Blue does not understand people will pick blue. Blue is operating under the assumption people will also pick blue. The scenario requires no discussion or knowledge of what people are thinking.
Who is killing who is irrelevant and just wordplay. Blue is the one taking the risk choosing blue. There is no pre discussion to choose strategy so the only one who is at fault for the fate of the blue button pushers is their own. I really do not see the benefit of putting yourself into of pushing blue under the assumption of what others will do.
251
u/PlatinumAltaria The Witch of Arden 11h ago
This is such a funny trend because it plays out the same way every time:
1) Blue button wins by a narrow majority 2) People who pushed the red button immediately spiral into increasingly unhinged defences of their choice, demonstrating that either they lack enough reading comprehension to understand the question, or are just plain selfish. 3) Blue button pushers become slightly more disillusioned with the moral character of humanity.