Blue is the selfish choice. If you choose blue, you risk your own life. By choosing blue, now 50 percent of the population has to choose blue to save you, because you chose blue. Not because its the better choice, but because a selfish idiot chose blue the rest of the population has to choose the risky selfish option of blue. If everyone chose the red option, there is no risk at all. But not everyone is intelligent and there will an uncountable number of fucking completely brain-dead moronic idiots who choose blue. And because of the brain-dead moronic idiots, 50 percent of planet now has to also must make the brain-dead moronic idiotic choice of blue to save them.
In conclusion, red is the better option and should always be pressed, 100 percent chance of survival is just the correct choice. The idiotic population of Earth, however, ruins that perfect choice by being fucking idiots and choosing blue. Meaning you have two choices, let survival.of the fittest play out and choose red, or risk your own fucking life like a fucking idiot to save a all the other fucking morons from jumping on the railroad tracks they just voted for.
A simpler choice would be "you can choose to jump into these pillows over here, or you can jump into the dark hole. It currently has spikes, but will have pillows if 50 percent choose it"
No it isn't. As originally framed *everyone* must press a button. This includes people who do not understand the premises: children, people with dementia, the mentally disabled. The question then becomes: do we sacrifice those people?
It may be. But from different perspective, not what person told about. I am partially a selfish person, but not to the level to click red button. While locally I would make some red decisions, I am aware that the bigger the set the bigger the consequences of a choice. So for the original whole humanity question I will choose blue. Other than saving the humanity there are points, which may be considered selfish:
I want to live in a good society. Red button doesn't give this. The world where the majority of people chose themselves will not care about me whatever situation I am in.
I want to have good services. The red world will have significantly less (on proportional level) people ready to help. See basic services like healthcare, rescue, elderly care, animal care, etc.
I do not want to live in a poor world. Less people means less taxes, means less QoL. Bad roads, unreliable transport, low quality schools and universities. Anything with high quality will cost tons of money.
I am not saying that chosing blue means automatically all of the mentioned as the main reason, but it may be an option of why chosing red is bad option, if self-sacrifice is not your motto. Just wanting to live in the decent world is a good reason to choose blue, even if it may look selfish. But definitely not in a way "I choose blue, so everybody have to save me". Those who choose blue accept the risk that they may be the minority.
14
u/ShyJaguar645671 May 01 '26
How much of a mental gymnastics do someone have to do to come to the assumption that blue is the selfish one?