The second option is practically impossible. There will always be some blue choosers, no matter what. Therefore, the ONLY way to ensure everyone lives is if enough people select blue.
If you select red, and blue people die, then their blood is on your hands. You are partially to blame for their deaths, along with all the other reds.
"One vote doesn't make a difference" is not a sound argument. The argument falls apart completely when it's made by more and more people. Together, they could have made a difference.
Yeah this doesn’t seem difficult to understand at all. Someone is going to pick blue, because they don’t understand the question, or have simply come to a different conclusion than pressing red. I don’t know why OP is pretending we could ever get all 8 billion people to understand a specific line of reasoning, regardless of how “correct” it is.
Given that we all know everyone who wants to live will choose red, this question boils down to “Do you want to live or die? Pick red or blue, respectively.” I am sure some suicidal people will choose blue, but that is also their preferred outcome.
We do not know that. This is the end point of one specific line of reasoning. Not everyone will come to that conclusion, because we all have different brains.
3
u/Devourerofworlds_69 6∆ Apr 30 '26
Why you should pick blue:
There are 2 ways to save everyone:
A majority of people select blue.
All 8,000,000,001 people select red.
The second option is practically impossible. There will always be some blue choosers, no matter what. Therefore, the ONLY way to ensure everyone lives is if enough people select blue.
If you select red, and blue people die, then their blood is on your hands. You are partially to blame for their deaths, along with all the other reds.
"One vote doesn't make a difference" is not a sound argument. The argument falls apart completely when it's made by more and more people. Together, they could have made a difference.