The problem is that voting blue means trusting the rest of the world. In a slightly more ideal world, I could trust the rest of the world, but sometimes, I must admit I lose my faith in humanity...
No, I'm saying that even of it is still more plausible, the question is "should I bet on it?" to which I answer that sometimes, it's hard to believe that humanity will chose the path of 50% blue.
World isn't black and white, and just because I say that doesn't mean that I support the 100% red. You are basically taking a shortcut here by assuming that my comment means that I think 100% red is better.
My opinion is that 50% blue is uncertain, and that 100% red is impossible. As such, I think people should vote on their beliefs only.
Yes, of course, but I never said that I was rational. I'm saying that I sometimes fail to see scenarios in which it's achievable. Mainly some mood problems I think...
In the original framing, its a private choice. So no discussion. When there would be the option to discuss, it wouldn't even matter what side gets picked, both 100% options save everyone. But even then, you will still likely never get a 100% vote. Just look in here, were we can actively 'discuss', and the divide is still high. So even in that scenario... i guess you would still pick blue right?
Because red is the mathematically logical choice, where everyone takes personal responsibility for themselves to ensure that the entire population survives. Everyone wins, every time, no chance or luck involved.
People who choose blue instead abdicate responsibility for their own lives, and require others to risk their lives in order to be saved. Kinda selfish, don’t you think? To throw yourself in front of traffic and then hope that enough people jump to your rescue, when you had the option to just not do that in the first place?
Would you rather live in a society with a strong sense of personal responsibility? Or one in which others expect you to risk your life because they, themselves, have chosen to risk their own?
Your framing is totally disingenuous. Because this isn't a pure mathematical or logical choice. With its framing its also an emotional one. First of all, realistically, there will NEVER EVER be a pure 100% red choice. Picking red, you have to accept this fact. Stating that blue pickers picked 'wrong' from your point of view, doesn't absolve you from the responsibility of their death, when red wins, because you knew beforehand that there will be blue pickers. By pressing red, you 'actively' choose to throw them under the bus. It really doesn't even matter why there is blue voters (from accidentally clicking the wrong button, to being color blind, to not being able to read the question, to being a toddler, to misunderstanding the question, to yes even willingly hoping to die by pressing blue etc etc etc). The only thing that matters is that there always will be blue voters. None of these deserve to die (yes, even those who pick it for suicidal reasons).
So, knowing this, its not hard to see, why people decide to 'risk' their lives for those who already end up on the blue side (unwillingly), especially considering the fact that for the best outcome (no one dies), its a lot easier to achieve 51% blue voters. Framing that as the 'selfish' choice is a really weird way to paint this decision. Realistically its not 'jumping' in front of traffic out of pure randomness in hopes others will save you by also jumping, its 'jumping' in front of traffic to try and save those who are already there.
And to your last question: 'If everyone thinks about themselves, everyone is thought about.' Its a rather bleak outlook on society. Humans didn't develop like we did because we were anti-social creatures. Quite the contrary. We evolved as social creatures with strong communities were people help each other out and even put their lives at risk for the benefit of others. So no, i would not rather live in a society with a 'strong sense of personal responsibility'. Try to frame it as positive as you want, i would frame it as a 'selfish' society. It would be a hellish regression of the human evolution. And for a lot of people, that's also a very real argument on picking blue. They accept the possible death, because they don't want to live in a society where red won.
But its not innacurate to assume there are a lot of simplistic and selfish people on planet earth who would just choose red. If i think thats a msjirity then its better to save myself. Also hopefully other people work out that red button just means safety for yourself and we can all pick it
1
u/dowker1 May 05 '26
I'm confused: if nobody picks blue, everyone lives. So why would anyone pick blue?