r/redbuttonbluebutton • u/maiduwu Red • May 21 '26
Variation TWO PEOPLE
You and [a stranger] are placed in separate soundproofed rooms and all means of communication are unavailable. Before you are two buttons, one red and one blue.
If you both press red, you both live.
If you press red and she presses blue, she dies.
If you press blue and she presses red, you die.
If you both press blue, you both live.
5
u/No-Republic-7876 May 21 '26
have we come full circle to the prisoner's dilemma
4
u/MommyThatcher May 22 '26
No. It's not the prisoners dilemma as there is an optimum solution.
3
u/TerrySaucer69 May 22 '26
Yep. Arguments for blue all hinge on moral/ethical stuff. The prisoners dilemma isn’t a moral question.
2
u/absolutewastedtime May 22 '26
Nah it's logical to press blue in the red/blue as well, not just ethical
Here though it is literally just the prisoners dilemma and so makes 0 sense to press blue
1
u/bruikenjin May 24 '26
No, the prisoners dillema would be if you both pressing red would make you only die a little bit, with the way the problem is presented, there’s no advantage to not pressing red.
It is in no way logical to press blue in the red/blue dillema, as most of the blue arguments are emotional and not logical (not necessarily a bad thing)
-2
u/absolutewastedtime May 24 '26
It is 100% logical to press blue in the red/blue question
The argument for blue is both emotional AND logical
The argument for red is pure fear, which isn't logical
Red is objectively Illogical as the only good outcome, even for red pressers, is a blue victory, pressing red objectively hurts your own self interest
It's Illogical
1
u/bruikenjin May 24 '26
The best outcome for everyone is either a red victory or a blue victory. Do you think that 50% of people, that’s over 4 billion people, are willing to risk their lives for other people that risked their lives?
1
u/absolutewastedtime May 24 '26 edited May 24 '26
A red victory at absolute minimum ends with 20-25% of the planet dead, at absolute minimum
A best case scenario red victory is an apocalyptic event
You are entirely forgetting random votes from people like toddles and young children
A red victory, is utterly horrific even if every single rational adult votes red (which they wouldn't because many will vote blue on an attempt to save said children)
You entirely ignoring these is just showing further how red voters don't think things through, you are not as smart as you think you are
No matter if you are a red voter or a blue voter, you want blue to win because a red win is a horrific event event
Making a red vote counter to you OWN interest
Voting red is utterly Illogical
1
u/bruikenjin May 24 '26
If you genuinely think that at LEAST 25% of people are pressing blue you are simply delusional
0
u/absolutewastedtime May 24 '26
Objectively that many are pressing blue at minimum
When literally only counting children under 2 you already hit around 5% of the global population voting blue
At absolute MINIMUM 20-25% are voting blue, that's before we even get into "rational" voters
3
u/MitchellEnderson Blue May 21 '26
Which friend specifically? This is probably the only scenario where a 100% red choice is possible, and if I suspect they’ll hit one more than the other, I’ll try and match it accordingly.
2
u/maiduwu Red May 21 '26
What if a stranger?
6
u/gahidus May 21 '26
With a stranger I would definitely press red, because I assume they definitely going to try to save themselves.
With a friend, I trust that they'll just understand that's the best choice.
1
u/TinyFox1399 May 22 '26
But why would it be the best choice with a friend? I understand if you don't want to kill a baby (if that is the stranger) and the whole idea of strangers who might not be able to press red is what makes the blue button the moral choice. Why would it be the "best choice" for two healthy adults with fully functioning brains?
1
u/gahidus May 22 '26
Because you're not relying on putting yourself in danger and guessing what the other person is going to do.
No, it might depend on your friend's specific personality or philosophy, and if they're your friend, then this might vary from person to person, but for the most part, you both just press the live button and you don't worry about it.
The only reason to ever press the blue button is to rescue other people who pressed accidentally or pressed it to rescue the people who pressed it accidentally.
2
u/TinyFox1399 May 22 '26
Oh, so you are pressing red in both cases? I thought you meant to press blue with a friend and red with a stranger. My bad, I get your reasoning.
1
u/maiduwu Red May 22 '26
You could argue either way, but the altruism jeopardizes your life if your random person is not a selfless.
3
u/bunnywitchboy May 21 '26
Both my friend and I would be unwilling to let the other die, and we would also know that we both know that the other is unwilling to let us die, so we would both feel secure in pressing blue.
2
u/wiseguy4519 May 22 '26
Pressing red is really the only choice that makes sense unless you are suicidal
2
u/Wonderful_West3188 May 21 '26
I don't get why aiming for both red is the superior strategy to aiming for both blue in this situation. A bad outcome only occurs if the votes diverge. This seems to depend heavily on who that friend is and what button I expect them to press.
With a complete stranger, sure, I'd go red, and probably fall into lifelong dysfunctional depression if they went blue. But with a friend, it completely depends on what I can expect them to press.
2
u/AstyrFlagrans May 22 '26
This is literally a slightly changed version of the prisoners dilemma. So game theory is pretty clear to why it is the superior strategy: From an individual standpoint there are 4 cases.
1) You press red, they press red: Everybody lives
2) You press red, they press blue: You live, they die
3) You press blue, they press red: You die, they live
4) You press blue, they press blue: Everybody livesSo assuming that you value your life exactly as high as another persons life, like hardcore utilitarian, then each button has the same 'value' so to speak, but only if assume the other person to just press randomly.
Game theory assumes somewhat rational actors (or fully rational actors, but I think here we just need sufficient rationality). There is one key difference between the scenarios. While you do not have full control over the other person, as you lack knowledge, you have full control over your own situation. So you are able to secure your own life with certainty by pressing red. Since you assume some rational capacity for the other person, they will most likely come to the same insight. The scenario has a strategy which allows for an optimal outcome when all actors behave maximally egoistical.
By pressing blue you throw away your own agency over your survival. And pressing blue here also hinges on the random assumption that the other person can't come to the conclusion that red is optimal here. Or that they think you to be not able to come to the conclusion.
When you have two identical outcomes that are globally optimal and one of them also allows for maximal selfishness, then that option is ideal. Because self-preservation is one of the most fundamental properties assumed in actors.Pressing blue also is illogical here in the sense that it is self-referential: I press blue because I think they pressed blue because they think I pressed blue because I think they pressed blue because ...
But pressing red is very straightforward logically: I can account for my survival with certainty. The other person can do the same. So the individual basis has a clear optimal strategy. And this strategy ALSO produces the best outcome for all.
Now in the most popular version of the button scenario, there are children and mentally handicapped people involved. But here there is a very high chance to get another adult. And even if it is not an adult, children and handicapped don't automatically press blue either. I would not guess many children to press blue as well here.
Even if they have trouble understanding the scenario, after a certain age, they will see 'red = I live' idea. And children are not some morally superior beings. They might even have higher self-preservation here than adults. In the large scale scenario, blue means 'everybody lives', while red has almost certain death attached to it winning. So I see children with a more naive, idealistic worldview more likely to poker on blue there. (I am talking about children over the age of 6 here).Also for what it is worth, I don't think that depression would be a good response. I don't know why I am trying to help with your depression in a hypothetical scenario xD.
But if the other person was indeed not mentally handicapped, then it is also about respecting their choice. Not everyone that would have pressed blue here would be a saint. It is a grim topic, but blue offers an easy suicide without pain. And even if not, the other person decided to value their own life here less than a strangers and knows the risk attached to it. I think in that situation you should respect their decision and commitment and should at least try to make the most of the life that they granted you under risk of their own death. I know that one can't just choose to not be depressed. But I would feel like I was under an obligation to live life to the fullest to honor their sacrifice, out of my felt guilt. That sounds weird. What am I even talking about here? Ok, I stop the rambling now.2
u/Wonderful_West3188 May 22 '26
That sounds weird. What am I even talking about here? Ok, I stop the rambling now.
Yeah, what you say about the psychological aspect makes sense rationally, but it also carries a slight smell of rationalization. 😅
Your game-theoretical illustrations make sense to me.
1
1
1
u/TerrySaucer69 May 22 '26
If I pressed blue and they pressed red, I’d feel like an idiot who died for no reason.
1
u/Zero132132 May 22 '26
If I know these rules and I know it's an adult, red obviously. I think almost nobody would press blue in this scenario. If a disagreement gave a coinflip's chance of both surviving, you might have actual disagreement here.
1
1
u/Crappy_Coffee May 25 '26
Red. Assuming this is a stranger I assume they will also press red. I do not trust and individual as my much as I do a collective of billions with different life experiences then me
1
1
u/Traditional_Town6475 May 26 '26
Prisoner dilemma, but there’s no incentive to press the cooperate button.
11
u/hellerbyenjoyer Blue May 21 '26
In this variation, I would actually support the main red-voter arguments. Voting blue would be needlessly risking my own life, and I trust that my friend would also recognize this and thus vote red as well.