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 I'm assuming not because it makes the thought experiment more interesting. Otherwise it a rather dull "everyone votes red".

Well then, if all babies and toddlers are going to die because they can't push buttons, and most very young children would die because they can't properly comprehend the question, the experiment would become the boring 'nearly everyone pushes blue'.

And even with incompetent people not being brought into the matter, it seems that many people would still vote blue, and think it's the only moral option. So I don't think that holds true.

Choosing red poses no risk at all for the person pressing the button

I don’t believe they would vote blue. Most people wouldn’t risk dying to save people they don’t know, regardless of age.

I do agree on that - but I have to think there would be so many parents, grandparents, uncles and aunts etc with very young relatives they'd like to ensure the safety of, that the blue vote would get over the 50% line very easily.

Red. Total no brainer.

I admire your faith in humanity, genuinely. When it comes to the crunch, and if it’s a snap decision, self preservation wins every time.

It's not about faith in humanity; I have little of that. I just cannot imagine the vast majority of parents (or grandparents) pressing the red button if it would mean the deaths of their children and grandchildren.

Self-preservation is generally only rivalled or overwhelmed by the instinctive desire for one's descendants to survive.

I'll be back when I've had some coffee.

You must have misremembered it as it doesn’t make sense as written (it isn’t any sort of conundrum).

Or they could be taking the piss.

Contrariness is an endemic quality of MN these days.

Red, because everyone has the option to press red and survive. Anyone who pushes blue and doesn't survive is choosing it. Red is the only safe option that gives everyone the option of surviving.

Is there a champagne button ? I'd press that. Multiple times.

The point of game theory is that betraying someone is the only way to guarantee you win something/won’t suffer the worst fate, but you’re still worse off than if you both cooperated.

Well then I guess it depends whether you think millions of your fellow human beings dying makes you worse off.

@SnappyQuoter

the point of game theory is not that betrayal is necessary to win. You are focusing on one particular thought exercise. Game theory supposes that people will act in their own self interest. This has proven true when tested in experimental and applied conditions.

Game theory has been used as the basis for forming systems and rules that provide optimized outcomes for the greater community. It has strong applications in resource management.

You don’t have to design a “game” where someone wins and someone loses. It’s possible as the person in charge of a regulatory environment, project, or auction, to write the rules to maximize the value to stakeholders. Will everyone be happy with the outcome? Probably not. But if your goal is to best serve a population, you can use game theory to design a system to reach that goal just as easily as you can to show that people are assholes.

I’m waiting for the reveal that this question was run before in the 90s / 2000s before the economic and demographic changes bit hard,.

And most voted blue.

How cultures change and destroy themselves…

So much of the intuition depends on how the question is framed.

Everyone is led into a room, blindfolded and given an empty pistol.

Those who wish to are permitted to get a bullet and put it into their gun.

All must then put the gun to their heads.

If more than 50% have chosen a bullet then the experiment is stopped. Otherwise all are required to pull the trigger.

Should you put a bullet into your gun?

Even before then it probably would be the same. You cant change human instinct that quickly

Still wouldn’t do that though.

I'd like to think I'd be philanthropic and press blue. But obviously if I'm hellbent on my own survival at any cost, then red.
But pressing red feels a bit like voting for the party that serves you best personally rather than the one that's best for the country. You're pissing on all the people who don't understand the question, or who are voting blue in the hope that they can save everyone.
Really interesting question, thanks OP.

But if you choose blue and your loved ones choose red, you are leaving them without you. So even thinking about others it’s not one-sided.

You do know that that is exactly what most people do in elections, don’t you? Do you honestly believe people vote against their own interests for the sake of the country? Some may of course but I would bet it’s rare, despite what people claim.

And you aren’t pissing over anyone by voting red. They have the right to do the same and if they don’t understand the question surely they are just as likely to vote red too.

I think voting blue because you have some level of faith in human nature is well meaning but incredibly naive

She hasn't misremembered. This question is all over the Internet for the last couple of weeks.

Excellent observation. Now it’s a trolley problem — acts of omission vs commission.

Framing this as purely a morality test is an oversimplification. A pragmatic decision is an equally valid decision. (Most) Humans are wired with survival instincts, and many people will prioritise staying alive, protecting loved ones, and ensuring they stay alive to help others rather than placing their lives and their families lives, entirely in the hands of strangers.

The red button/blue button is an example where blind faith could be detrimental to your health and the health of all those you care about.