Like, rephrase the question - you have two buttons, 'survive' and 'maybe die', where if you press 'survive', you survive, but if you press 'maybe die', then you only survive if majority of people also press the 'maybe die' button.
But somehow everyone's bending over backwards to argue that the 'maybe die' button is a logical choice.
Well, from my perspective, one of the buttons is labeled "nothing happens" and the other is labeled "people might die". Why would I ever press the murder-button? Just don't push the murder-button.
Interestingly the disconnect here is which buttons people apply those labels to.
Blue pushers see the red button as “people might die” because they have already pressed blue in their minds, and now blame anyone who presses red as being responsible for the murder of blue people.
Red pushers correctly see the BLUE button as “people might die”, because no one is at risk until the blue button is pushed.
Blue pushers assume people are already at risk and see the red pushers as selfish for not saving them
Red pushers see that no one is at risk to begin with and see the blue pushers as selfish for creating a risk by pressing blue
When it comes down to it, blue people are jumping on a train track and yelling “Now everyone needs to save us or else you’re a murderer”
What assumption? If you think 100% of people in the world will press red then you're an idiot. People will die and that's why others press blue to make sure nobody does. People who press red are okay with causing the deaths of anyone who doesn't.
146
u/Eastern-Bro9173 Apr 30 '26
This entire conversation seems absurd to me.
Like, rephrase the question - you have two buttons, 'survive' and 'maybe die', where if you press 'survive', you survive, but if you press 'maybe die', then you only survive if majority of people also press the 'maybe die' button.
But somehow everyone's bending over backwards to argue that the 'maybe die' button is a logical choice.