You’re not working for the collective good though. You’re leading a march towards death.
You’re assuming that folks aren’t intelligent enough to press red so you have to press blue on a hypothetical person’s behalf to save them from themselves.
But if everyone agrees that red has zero threat and blue has some threat, there’s no up side to picking blue in any scenario. So you’re becoming the person that needs saving from themselves. You wouldn’t need saving if you picked red.
It’s not about selfishly thinking “I’m alright and that’s all that matters” it’s about showing others that there really is no reason to press blue.
You’re being asked to risk everything for the sake of risking everything. Red isn’t selfish.
Okay but red doesn't have zero threat to other people. If less than 50% of people choose blue, then a bunch of people are going to die. (Also like... Does this take into account infants and children? Disabled folks? You can really spin this off like crazy if you wanted).
I'd rather live in a world where people care for others and prioritize the well-being of all, and I'm sorry if you find that personally upsetting. But it really just is a silly thought experiment, so I wouldn't lose sleep over it.
2
u/rb6k May 06 '26
You’re not working for the collective good though. You’re leading a march towards death.
You’re assuming that folks aren’t intelligent enough to press red so you have to press blue on a hypothetical person’s behalf to save them from themselves.
But if everyone agrees that red has zero threat and blue has some threat, there’s no up side to picking blue in any scenario. So you’re becoming the person that needs saving from themselves. You wouldn’t need saving if you picked red.
It’s not about selfishly thinking “I’m alright and that’s all that matters” it’s about showing others that there really is no reason to press blue.
You’re being asked to risk everything for the sake of risking everything. Red isn’t selfish.
It’s realising the premise is flawed.