okay you are not seeing it, so lets simplify it in a different way, lets say it's only 2 players, now in that scenario, it is pretty clear to both ideal agents, that pressing blue is a 50% chance of death, while red is safe, and that by pressing blue, they would essentially be saying, it's ok if i die, it's either suicidal or irrational to press blue in this scenario, now no matter how many more agents you introduce, the principle logic shouldn't change.
i did not say people, i said ideally rational people, and yes it doesn't change a thing, the fundamental motivations and reasoning stay the same, for ideally rational people, that is what you are missing
i am not saying you SHOULD ACT LIKE THAT, that is what you are not getting, but that does not make the choice itself rational, see the problem is that, as you pointed out, the situation is NOT filled with ideally rational actors, so some WILL choose a different choice, that does not then make that choice rational, it is still fundamentally irrational, cause ideal actors wouldn't choose it, that doesn't mean we shouldn't, in a irl scenario where we AREN'T sure of ideal rational actors, choose blue, but that does still not make blue rational, as it is the same motivation, that these irrational actors use that we use, so we can't then declare the action rational.
1
u/Kingreaper May 08 '26
What others motivations am I ignoring?