AIBU to wonder which button people would press to survive?

No, I do not get these types of things at all. They are never going to happen, so I do not understand why peopel call eachother names over them.

I will mash both buttons together. But I will be more worried and asking why I was in that situation to start with.

You havent understood the riddle have you?

The reds playing eugenics

Morons, selfish, stupid, pillocks etc.
I am pressing blue to get rid of you lot who just want to use a hypothetical situation to finally get to call people names.

I am going for virtue signalling personally. In the moment when its a guarantee for being selfish or a risk for being altruistic, it would be reds all the way.

I suppose part of the issue is a definition of everyone.

Are we talking about toddlers? Blind people having assistance to recognise which one is which or having to pick randomly?

IIf I imagine only people with capacity pushing the buttons, I'd see red as the best choice- everyone can press their own survival.

If absolutely everyone including young children who can't coached, I might have more faith in world-wide coordination leading to more than half blues.

I feel like saying one would press blue just outs one as either a dangerously naive optimist, or an insincere virtue signaller.

And I have to think that it's very easy to say that one would press blue...but if it were real, and one was standing in front of the buttons...I wonder how many people would actually press blue. Very few, I think. Self-preservation is a strong instinct.

But it really isnt. If everyone who wants to live picks red then they are guaranteed to live either way.

Anyone who picks blue is a pillock!

What rewards? Everyone lives? Is that a reward? Frankly, as somewhat of a misanthrope, it's win/win for me, pressing the red.

I know every close to me would press red, so whatever happens, I'm golden.

I always work on logic, so yes I would press red.

Red I will definitely live, blue I might not.

It’s actually scary how many people would choose red and give themselves a pat on the back for doing so. You only need more than half the people to choose blue so it’s a pretty small gamble with huge rewards.

Brilliant article by an actual philosopher of all things on this and similar scenarios (fans of game theory, consider this your trigger warning 🤣)

https://www.goodthoughts.blog/p/buttons-blenders-and-coordination

I’m beginning to want to join you in there 🤦🏻‍♀️😂

I agree with you. I would press red.

Who some idiot on twitter has written because they misunderstood game theory and missed out on the actual interesting debate that comes with it.

This is a simple “everyone lives or everyone dies” choice. So everyone would choose red so that everyone can live, with no personal risk to yourself.

Prisoner’s dilemma, game theory, comes with risk no matter what. And it’s about weighing up that risk - choosing for yourself, even though there could be a slightly bad outcome but it’s better than nothing, or choose for the group even though it could mean you get nothing. That’s an interesting discussion. This is just stupid people vs anyone with a brain, because there is an option that has no personal or group risk of everyone goes for it. So everyone would.

This. The only real, sensible choice is the red button. Anyone who presses blue is not thinking clearly at all.

You are totally missing the point here, yes ‘stupid’ people will press the blue button The moral part is whether you want to try and save those people or let them die. This could include young children, people who are mentally impaired (conditions like dementia), low IQ or other reasons for not being able to comprehend.

You don't betray a stranger by choosing to live. We all had the same information, i am not responsible for their choice or the consequences, they are not responsible for mine, or the consequences.

Thank you! I'm not big into game theory, and I'm also not a fan of analytical philosophy as it's so rigid. But always great to hear a different perspective!

I’m sure you do. Just like all the posters on the legal board who say nonsense advice and then say “I have a law degree.” Or people on the mental health boards who tell you to just smack your autistic kid and then say they have a degree in psychology.

Good luck on your philosophy journey. But I don’t know why philosophers who don’t know what the prisoner’s dilemma is.

I will be getting in the blender and asking someone to press the button, because these things are bullshit and just gets people calling each other stupid over an impossible situation.

Or people who choose the blue pill are choosing to put the control over whether they live or die in then hands of random strangers. No thanks.

“It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.” Charles Darwin.

People are choosing blue, not because of morality but because of a lack of knowledge or intelligence.

For an actual moral debate, there needs to be three outcomes with risk/reward for the group be risk/reward for the individual. That gives a debate on morality.

This question gives a debate on stupidity. Only stupid people would pick blue, and I’d assume in a life or death situation that people could figure out that everyone will be thinking “red is guaranteed survival” so everyone would choose it. There is no downside. There needs to be personal downside and risk for this to become a morality debate.

Please don't stress yourself out over this, I have PhD in philosophy, you don't need to explain anything to me.