AIBU to wonder which button people would press to survive?

[Boxingshibes]

Everyone on earth takes a private vote by pressing a red or blue button.

If more than 50% of people press the blue button, everyone survives.

If less than 50% of people press the blue button, only people who pressed the red button survive. Which button would you press?

Red or blue
Red- aibu
Blue-ainbu

And this is why posting about truly hypothetical situations that will never happen are stupid when you call the people who would pick different to you as "morons".

It’s not an ethical dilemma because it has an easy solution with no risk or negative outcome or downsides for anyone. So everyone would choose red.

For this to be game theory, ethical dilemma then there needs to be an actual downside to choosing red, that people can weigh up against the possible rewards and bigger downsides. As I’ve outlines above.

Red obviously . Everyone who presses red survives.

I said my own children would have been morons if they pressed blue.

Which they would have been. There is no moral or logical reason to press blue whatsoever.

Red comes with a risk for everyone who doesn't pick red. The risk is, am I willing in act in self interest knowing others could die. The risk for blues is am I willing to put my life in other's hands to save lives. Both come with risk, it's just which risk you feel most comfortable with.

No one would get in the blender. It can run empty and no one gets hurt. There needs to be another outcome, like a small amount of damage to everyone if no one gets in the blender.

Game theory has three outcomes.

A)Great for everyone in the group.

B)Good for the person who “betrays” but really bad for the person who doesn’t.

C)Somewhat bad for all, but at least guarantees survival/prize/freedom - just not as good as it would be if everyone cooperated.

Tbf getting rid of the pointless virtue signalers would improve the human race so it's a win win scenario.

You are clearly wrong or all the answers would say red. That’s the whole point of the question, it’s that people think there is a moral dilemma when actually the logical common sense choice would be to red but as you can see, loads of people think that picking blue is somehow morally better? Thinking that people who choose blue could be mentally impaired or have accidentally pressed it and we need to save those people by also choosing blue. That’s why it is going viral and there is a lot of discussion around it.

If you cannot see the risk of choosing yourself knowing others may die, then that's definitely one approach. It doesn't make it the definite answer, but a great starting point for debate, as we've seen on this thread. What has been shocking is how quick people have been to call 'blue pushers' morons, and that the world would be better off without them. To the point where blue pushers are saying they feel stupid. Very interesting social experiment!

No, pressing red doesn’t come with risk because philosophically speaking, no one would pick blue. There is no personal risk to choose red and there is no group risk to everyone choosing red. There is personal and group risk to choosing blue. Everyone would choose red because we would all understand that everyone else can u first and the question and see the obvious choice with no risk or downside.

This isn’t game theory. How many times do I need to explain an actually moral dilemma game theory scenario?

But red doesn't come with a risk? If everyone picked red there would be no consequences which is not true if you chose blue.

We are not discussing game theory, we are discussing the OP‘s question

The blender situation is exactly the same as the button situation.

There is no reason to get in the blender, or to press the blue button.

People may pretend they will vote blue because they mistakenly think that is the 'kind' thing to do online, but when it really comes down to it I would hope self preservation and logic would kick in.

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

I apologise as it was something I read on X and wondered what mumsnet thought. Not invented it or anything.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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

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.

I agree with you. I would press red.