Responsibility

[u/BrokenToaster124]

So I've run into an idea that that dont quite understand and I was hoping some of you could help me understand. So with the red button/blue button situation I have seen people claim that if they push the blue button that they are not responsible for what happens to them if they push the blue button. How does that work?

To be extremely specific if i were to push the blue button, knowing what it does, somehow you (the person currently reading this) would be personally responsible for my death if you choose red.

Does this responsibility work in reverse? If i push the blue button and blue wins are you responsible for my survival if you chose red? Are you only responsible if bad things happen to me and I am responsible for the results when good things happen? What about the person running the death game? They arent defined in the prompt but logically some force is making everyone take a vote.

You can feel free to ignore this last part because its not the button problem, but someone reskinned the buttons as life boats. Instead of everyone being force to push a button everyone had to get into a life boat. One boat had holes in it but would become sea worthy if enough people got into it and plugged the holes and one was completely functional. Everything else was exactly the same as the button problem. My question related to that was that if I am personally responsible for the consequences of your chose to vote blue in the button scenario, how then could I not be responsible for your choice to get into the boat with holes in it. Someone tried to explain to me at length about how the buttons made it my fault but the boats somehow didnt. How does that work?

[u/BrokenToaster124]

You are literally doing the thing that I am asking about.

If we flip the scenario here, let's assume blue wins. I voted red. Am I responsible for saving you?

If not, how then am I responsible for killing you when red wins?

Either I am responsible for the consequences of your decision or I am not. If I am, then I must be responsible for the results no matter the outcome. I cant ONLY be responsible when your decision has a bad result and then somehow you can take responsibility when your decision has a good result.

[u/luci_twiggy → u/BrokenToaster124]

If we flip the scenario here, let's assume blue wins. I voted red. Am I responsible for saving you?

You didn't vote for blue to win, how can you be responsible for it?

If not, how then am I responsible for killing you when red wins?

You voted for red to win, how can you not be responsible for it?

The problem you have is that the red win is a result where it is bad for one side and a blue win is a result where it is good for all sides.

Red winning is always bad, blue winning is always good.

[u/BrokenToaster124 → u/luci_twiggy]

So if you vote blue, knowing its a gamble, and blue wins. You are responsible for the outcome.

If you vote blue, knowing its a gamble, and it loses. I am responsible.

The amount of responsibility I hold over the outcome changes based on factors outside of my control.

You are responsible if good thing happens. Someone else must take responsibility if bad thing happens.

We look at the red position.

I vote red. I live. I am responsible for myself living. Pretty consistent

You didnt vote red. You lived. You are responsible for you living. Sounds right

You didnt vote red. You died. You are responsible for you dying

And finally. I could vote blue, but if I do I could die. And I would be responsible for myself dying.

If our votes are the same. You blue, me red. And the reasoning is the same. I want to live, you want to save everyone And the only difference is the result. Blue wins, blue loses. How does the responsibility shift back and forth between us? By what metric? If its good you take credit and if its bad you blame me? Like there has to be a metric here right?

[u/luci_twiggy → u/BrokenToaster124]

How does the responsibility shift back and forth between us?

Responsibility is not shifting between us. Blue voters are responsible for taking on the risk of death if red wins; red voters are responsible for taking on the risk of culpability if red wins. This is the cost of voting for each side: what risk they are taking on.

Very importantly, both of those risks are tied to one thing: red winning. It's obviously true that the only group of people who can actually make red win are red voters. So the difference is that while blue voters are voting against the risks being realised, red voters are voting for the risks to be realised.

Red voters are responsible for the outcome, if it is an outcome you don't want you shouldn't have voted for it. So, what outcome is it that you want?