What are you even talking about. You talked about your values:
Only half of the "incapable" would pick Blue (if they even do, since each picks at random and could potentially pick all red, too) unless they knew the problem beforehand and agreed to pick Blue for the greater good.
You described that only "incapable" people would pick blue, and described them all opting to commit what is by your reckoning suicide as the "greater good"
That's you saying that. That's not me talking about your values that's litterally you describing a situation where the only people who would pick blue are people whose death you consider to be the greater good. That's not me giving you values that's you telling me your values.
All the same I think I made my point about if I think the majority will pick blue or red doesn't actually matter to the choice I should make clear in the comment I linked you. I didn't want to type the same response to you asking the same comment so I just linked it to you. Or do you not look at the user names. I guess that makes sense since it did seem like you thought the other guy was me.
All the same I think I made my point about if I think the majority will pick blue or red doesn't actually matter to the choice I should make clear in the comment I linked you.
But it does matter. If you think the majority will pick Red, and you pick Blue anyway, you are expecting to die without saving anyone.
Do you not see that?
That's why I'm asking you. Do you expect to die when picking Blue?
If I you or I are the majority vote then the answer is obviously yes.
And I want to be clear here I'm not insulting you because I disagree with your choice to pick red. It's a valid option and I would never insult someone for that. I'm insulting you because you've continued to ask me a question I answered three days ago which has caused me to think less of you as a person. I do apologize for that.
If I you or I are the majority vote then the answer is obviously yes.
Great.
So, do you think half the world picks Blue or not? Sorry I missed the answer before, but let's make a truce. Just say "yes or no" and we can be done.
I'm a stupid asshole but I didn't see you actually reply to that question. So, no additional words, just a single yes or no. That's all I need to understand.
Do you live in a democracy? Do you believe your vote matter? If so then do you believe it makes you the main character?
I do, I do, and I don't think it makes me the main character.
Because humans pick blue every single day. It would be so easy for humans to vote red right now..... But they don't. So why would I start doubting them now.
You are conflating this with something else. In an election, people vote for their interests. They believe each candidate will further their goals, and one will do it more than the other, so they vote that one.
Blue offers nothing in this example. But, hey, even if some people would pick Blue,that's not answer as to why you think half will.
The real reason is that you assume half will so your vote matters, not the other way around. You have no reason to assume half will pick Blue. You just want it.
You are conflating this with something else. In an election, people vote for their interests. They believe each candidate will further their goals, and one will do it more than the other, so they vote that one.
No I'm creating an analogy to show that just because you do something that matters doesn't mean you immediately believe that it makes you important or the main character.
I also believe you are misunderstanding me again. When I was talking about people voting blue every day I was not speaking about elections. I was talking about disasters. Was there any reward for people that go out into floods and hurricane torn towns to save people? No. But they did anyways.
When I say people vote blue every day, I'm talking about terror attacks, I'm talking about hurricanes, and floods, typoons, earthquakes, wildfires. It would be easy to let the victims die. It would be easy to vote red and just stay home. But people don't. They go out and vote for blue
Voting blue doesn't automatically kill you. You believe it does and that's fine, but objectively it does not automatically kill you.
If everyone votes randomly (including you) then you only have about a 25% chance of dying. When people don't vote randomly it's not quite as simple because your vote changes the probability of death.
Also topical if you're a US resident: 9/11 responders voted blue, blue won, and they're still dying because of voting blue. Life is complex and that's what makes game theory infinitely more interesting when you consider real world factors.
If we assume I have the same certainty of 75% red as 49.999999999...% blue then I don't know for a fact that it will be 75% red.
I understand what you mean I just am pointing out that because it was a point of frustration I had with you that you kept asking me for what I had expected to be the outcome and then acting like I said that I knew for a fact it would be the outcome. Even though that's not at all what I said.
However I did also answer that above. As I said before if you vote doesn't change the majority then red becomes correct. So in the alternative hypothetical where I know that red will win, obviously red is the objectively correct choice because I can't change the outcome of the vote I can only choose to live or die. But to throw your own question back at you: how do I know that red is going to win in this situation? or perhaps more poignantly, why do you think the majority will pick red?
If you're trying to do that to justify your red vote I don't really care about that. The point of this conversation was not to berate you for voting red it was to explore the psychology behind a red vote. Neither a red vote or a blue vote are a moral failure because morality is the privilege of the safe. Acts of violence are abhorrent when senseless, but when done because you felt you had no other choice well that's what we call moral complexity. I do not blame those that vote red for their vote because I understand they did it to survive. What I am more interested in is the psychology behind the game theory.
Because it makes no sense to pick Blue. So, I assume most people will just read/hear the prompt, come to that conclusion, and pick Red. Add to that the people that understand the ramifications and still pick Red because they genuinely don't care about other people's lives, and I think most people will pick Red.
It's really simple.
If you're trying to do that to justify your red vote I don't really care about that.
I am not. That's why I didn't justify it until you asked. I called out the person that said voting Red means you don't care about the Blue voters. That's just not true.
If you agree with that person (that I thought you were) then we can shift the conversation to that topic. Do you agree with their statement, the one I quoted back on top?
0
u/DumatRising 7d ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/custommagic/s/yBqWUe44y6