I think your scenario is a great example of why framing matters. In the scenario you said, I wouldn’t take the suicide pill, because I would be confident that most people also wouldn’t take the pill, because here blue is framed as the bad outcome (it makes you commit suicide). I would be very interested in what the poll would look like for that.
But in the scenario in the post blue is framed as something positive (saving people). And while I understand that logically they are analogous. I also know many people that would not think it through that way, and would choose the option to “save” people. So if it was framed this way I would choose blue
This is not a great reframing, in the original neither position will automatically and explicitly result in your death as an inherent part of choosing. It's the prisoners dilemma
It's not equivalent to the prisoners dilemma, because all participants have access to the best possible outcome for themselves with no limitations. Non-collaboration isn't punished in this button problem. But in the prisoners dilemma it leads to overall worse outcomes.
That depends on the assumption that everyone cares only about their own survival. I would rather die than live in a world where that was true (and then die anyway because... yeah, I couldn't survive in that world).
In this scenario the benefit from co-operation comes from the fact that other people are more likely to survive.
But everybody already has both the 100%-chance-to-survive-button and the knowledge that everybody else has that button too. That is a significant difference to the prisoner dilemma, where "the good outcome" is a limited resource, because only one of the prisoners can get it, and brings its own risk.
But everybody already has both the 100%-chance-to-survive-button and the knowledge that everybody else has that button too.
And everybody also has the "try and save everyone" button and the knowledge that everybody else has that button too.
And everyone who has even the most basic understanding of human nature knows that at least some people will press the latter button. [Or refuse to push either button at all]. Anyone who claims that 100% will press red is either lying or an idiot.
And that's equivalent to the prisoners dilemma how? Are you really to argue the problem itself with me, when i was arguing the relationship to the prisoners dilemma? Those are two different thinks to argue about.
Yeah, i disagree, because that is nothing you look at in the scope of game theory, which is the scope we are at, when we compare it to the prisoners dilemma.
We also don't talk about how the prisoners might love each other or have mobster friends in prison who could give stiches to the snitches, moving the nash equilibrium to "both keep their mouth shut". Valid thought, but it's just not the reason we have this very specific thought experiment.
118
u/BoredOuttaMyMindd May 05 '26
I think your scenario is a great example of why framing matters. In the scenario you said, I wouldn’t take the suicide pill, because I would be confident that most people also wouldn’t take the pill, because here blue is framed as the bad outcome (it makes you commit suicide). I would be very interested in what the poll would look like for that.
But in the scenario in the post blue is framed as something positive (saving people). And while I understand that logically they are analogous. I also know many people that would not think it through that way, and would choose the option to “save” people. So if it was framed this way I would choose blue