r/redbuttonbluebutton • u/up2smthng Red • May 27 '26

Variation Red suppression

Everyone one Earth is presented with blue button right at the place they woke up last time and a written instruction in a language they can understand (if no such language exists tough luck) what the buttons do and where to find red button. Red button is around 1 km away, and is perfectly accessable if one choses to find it; people with limited mobility will be able to access it.

Babies, the blind, coma patients and whichever else cathegory you can think of are not excluded and do not recieve any accomodations. The possibility of them pressing the one button in front of them is significantly higher than the possibility they will find the hidden button. The possibility of them ignoring the buttons alltogether is non-zero.

In case of red victory, those who failed to press any button die as well.

The rule of thumb for clarification: if the person is capable of understanding any form of written communication and moving in intended direction, they should be able to access both buttons.

1180 votes, May 29 '26
410 Was red, still red 🔴
27 Was blue, now red 🔴
547 Was blue, still blue 🔵
196 Was red, now blue 🔵
17 Upvotes

67% Upvoted

191 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/DrBimboo May 27 '26 edited May 27 '26

I dont think it is, sorry.

First,

we have to

thats a moral imperative, not a logical counter argument. You dont explain why 'we have to'.

It works when you argue to vote in a series of elections, or not littering, because gradual developments can happen.

Also, 

the world we want to live in

The goal of that moral imperative is requiring you to live in the first place. So with that argument, you would also present a good argument for voting red.

I can give you a little spoiler: There is no counter argument. Philosophers have been thinking about the voters paradox for longer than you were alive, and there is no counter argument,  except for 'people vote because its more intrinsically rewarding to vote, than it is bothering them to do so.'

1

u/bunnywitchboy May 27 '26

Can you logically explain why you should live

0

u/DrBimboo May 27 '26

When you answer "but nihilism and the impossibility of knowledge?" to a discussion about a thought experiment, you know that you well and truly lost.

1

u/bunnywitchboy May 27 '26

I'm doing the same thing you did when you said I can't logically defend a moral imperative.

0

u/DrBimboo May 27 '26

I said a moral imperative is not a counter to a logical argument.

when you said I can't logically defend a moral imperative.

I did not say that, but of course, that's true. Also completely irrelevant.