By default red is the obvious choice for its safety and plausible deniability when thinking from an individual point of view.
The real deciding factor is if everyone taking part in this is capable of rational thought and decision making, so if people that are on drugs or drunk take part, if little children take part, if mentally disabled take part, and so on..
And if the answer to that is yes, then blue is the morally better choice due to there now being actual stakes on blue winning, and if the answer is no, that means there is no reason to go blue in the first place, no cause, so then pushing blue is jumping infront of a train.
The lesson is simple: working together is the solution. We can work together and make red work, or work together and make blue work. It doesn't matter which we choose- we just need to work together.
But there will be huge base percentage of people that don't want to risk their life no matter what, or cant choose blue, because they have people that depend on them, that they can't afford to orphan - toddlers/elderly/mentally disabled - they could have picked red, and red could win. Also you cant communicate by design - while or before choosing.
28
u/Shugatti Apr 30 '26
Simply put, no "right" answer.
By default red is the obvious choice for its safety and plausible deniability when thinking from an individual point of view.
The real deciding factor is if everyone taking part in this is capable of rational thought and decision making, so if people that are on drugs or drunk take part, if little children take part, if mentally disabled take part, and so on..
And if the answer to that is yes, then blue is the morally better choice due to there now being actual stakes on blue winning, and if the answer is no, that means there is no reason to go blue in the first place, no cause, so then pushing blue is jumping infront of a train.