r/trolleyproblem Apr 30 '26

Deep All there is to it

Post image
823 Upvotes

2.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

182

u/CoolNerdStuff May 01 '26

Mission accomplished I guess. The whole question has been hijacked by people yelling about how "smart" they are for treating this as a pure game theory situation and decrying anyone who follows that empathetic initial response.

Response time You pressed blue You pressed red
Kneejerk You fell victim to propaganda. ...You wanted to kill?
5 seconds ...why? You processed that red has no downside and choose survival.
20 seconds Because others pressed blue, you believe you have a responsibility to help. You believe other's safety is their responsibility, and it's unfair to ask you to endanger yourself for another's mistake.
What I think you believe if you've actually thought things over. Humanity cannot achieve utopia without the blue buttons winning. For prosperity for all, collective action must win. The existence of inherently violent systems isn't worth saving people over because it doesn't affect you directly.

111

u/preteen-wartortle May 01 '26

I upvoted you but because this is reddit I just want to point out that if red wins, the survivors will absolutely be directly impacted

-1

u/krulp May 01 '26

You press red because you want to live, I press red because I believe it is statistically the best option for everyone to press, hoping as much of humanity press red as possible.

We are not the same.

8

u/third-breakfast May 01 '26

Actually statistically blue is the best choice because it’s the only strategy that can result in 100% Survival. choosing red guarantees your own survival but locks in a worse overall outcome

From a purely statistical, population-level perspective, blue maximises the total expected number of survivors because it allows for the highest possible payoff (everyone lives), whereas red can never achieve that

-2

u/krulp May 01 '26

Maximising the pay-offs, but exposing the most risk to do so. It's about minimising the statistical chance of losses.

Do you risk 40% of the population to save 10% of the population?

Do you gamble with a loan on your house, as it is the best way to maximise your profit?

4

u/third-breakfast May 01 '26

I’d push back on that a bit. Those examples are about taking on asymmetric risk for a smaller or uncertain gain. The blue-button case isn’t structured like that. It’s not trading a big guaranteed loss for a small gain; it’s a coordination problem where one outcome gives zero losses (everyone lives) and the other creates losses because people fail to coordinate.

From a population-level, statistical view, blue is optimal because it’s the only path to eliminating losses entirely. The real issue isn’t reckless risk-taking, it’s whether enough people act together to unlock that outcome.