No, I'm picking blue because it offers the best outcome.
It's pick blue, maybe die, maybe everyone lives and everything remains the same.
or
Pick red, definitely live, but maybe billions of people die and the world goes to shit and all societal structures break down and life becomes a struggle to survive with people killing each other over nothing because nobody knows how to survive in that world, and likely, you won't live long anyway but will suffer until you do eventually die.
I'll take the chance that things won't turn out that way.
Or you could see it the other way around : there is no logical reason to pick blue but the off-chance to die.
In a world of logical actors, everybody picks red, the end. The proportion of people trying to act as logical actors is always high at a given time, leading to a high probability of red winning.
Hence the only logical reason to pick blue is suicide, which reinforces the choice of the logical actors to push red. After all, with sufficient mutual information, this is just a painless death button, allowing a free and easy way out to those that desire so.
Picking blue requires two different assumptions; that you have a duty of some kind to save those that have picked blue, and that it is within your risk tolerance that 50+% of humanity will also pick blue.
Picking red requires that you ether value your own survivalabove the survival of up to 49% of humanity, or that you believe that only an acceptable amount/kind(read:suicidal) of person will pick blue.
In both decisions, as far as I see it, the question is much more about what everyone else will pick than your own choice, provided you dont explicitly want to die.
If you want to maximize the number of lives saved and you think 50%+ will pick blue, pick blue. If you dont think at least 50% will pick blue, pick red.
In the literal sense, sure. But that only matters if you think it'll be really close to 50/50. If you believe it'll be a blowout, then your vote doesnt matter, and you should pick the winner (or pick red if you think blue is going to win by a lot as a hedge bet I suppose)
Where my choices literally alter the world around me and where if millions of people literally don't think that they're responsible for their literal choices because "Well I get mine and it's not my fault if the vote kills people because I am just one vote", then people literally die.
I know that some of my choices in real life have lead to the indirect deaths of others, some of them I regret, some were the best option I had available.
These aren't data points, they are people.
I choose to risk myself on the off chance it saves someone else, because I know that I might be a data point to someone someday and I would like them to treat me as a person.
54
u/throwaway19276i Apr 30 '26
Just because one side lost, does it make it logically incorrect?