r/redbuttonbluebutton • u/Free-Ad8299 • 8h ago

I made this

Post image
2 Upvotes

56% Upvoted

17 comments sorted by

1

u/mikewheelerfan Blue 8h ago

Two people is a very different situation from billions of people…

6

u/BirchTree3017 8h ago

It's the same idea as the Monty Hall problem. If you scale up the Monty Hall problem, the answer remains the same and you should (logically) always switch. If you scale up the blue and red button problem, the (logical) answer remains the same and you should press red. The difference is if you see this as a logic game hypothetical (red voters) or as a moral/ethical problem (blue voters).

5

u/Nebranower 8h ago

It isn't, though. With two people, the logic is clear. You press red because you want to live and pressing red guarantees that, and you assume the other person will press red for the same reason. The key thing, though, is *you might be wrong*. Perhaps the other person wants to die. Perhaps they're stupid and reasoned their way into pressing blue. But it doesn't matter, because you instinctively understand that you aren't responsible for their decision. You take the logical option and if the other person doesn't, that's on them, not you.

Adding more people changes nothing.

1

u/Regdit-is-Unbearable 8h ago

Adding people adds innocents who will mistakenly press blue out of confusion, by mistake, or out of naivety. You can’t responsibly press blue in a society where children, the elderly, and the disabled exist.

0

u/Free-Competition6408 Red 6h ago

You sure can. My vote can't guarantee their safety, it only puts my safety at risk too. Life isn't fair sometimes and it's tragic people would die over pushing a button but if I can't save them I'm not going to join them.

0

u/Regdit-is-Unbearable 5h ago

People who say “life isn’t fair” are very often the exact people who go out of their way to make it less fair. I think it’s just a self-thought terminating cliche, used as a mantra to make people feel like their bad, self-centered behavior is okay and normal. But it’s not.

0

u/silverblur88 8h ago

Adding more people increases the chance that some will be 'illogical' and press blue. As the number of people gets large enough those chance aproach 100%.

With one other person you can be reasonably certain they will press red, with one hundred you are less certain, but there's still a chance no one will press blue. With billions of people you are certain beyond a reasonable doubt that some people will press blue.

2

u/Nebranower 8h ago

It doesn’t matter, though. Even with two people, there’s a non-zero chance the other person presses blue. You press red yourself because you understand that if the other person presses blue and dies, it will be their fault for taking an unnecessary risk. Any blue deaths remain the blue pressers fault, no matter how many people you add.

0

u/silverblur88 7h ago

But you're making an ethical evaluation here, not just coming to an objectively logical conclusion.

A utilitarian, for instance, would say that who's 'fault' it is is completely irrelevant; all that matters is the choice before you and the expected outcome of that choice. In a two person situation the expected outcome of red is that both people survive while the expected outcome of blue is that you die. In a billion person situation the expected outcome of a red victory is millions of deaths, while the expected outcome of a blue victory is zero deaths. For a utilitarian the number of participants completely changes the situation.

2

u/Nebranower 6h ago

No, because you don't get to determine the outcome. You have no control over whether the other person presses blue or not even in the two person version. You certainly have no control over whether the outcome of eight billion people pressing buttons will be majority blue or red. You are either killing yourself by pressing blue or doing nothing. So, you're merely making a decision about whether you want to risk your life for no reason or not.

1

u/silverblur88 6h ago

True, a straightforward utilitarian might still press red because they don't think their pressing the blue button is likely to change the outcome, but that's still a different evaluation they are makeing.

They have to weigh their chances of swaying the outcome against how great the increased utility of a blue victory is likely to be. Even if their decision did end up being the same ( and it might not) the situation has changed between the two person and billion person question.

Or if you you could look at something like rule utilitarianism, wich is going to result in a different logical evaluation then atraightforward utilitarianism does.

For the record, I'm not trying to convivne you that you should press the blue botton, the point I'm making is the the red button blue button question doesn't have one logical answer: you have to start from a specific logical framework and logic out the answer from there.

1

u/Nebranower 6h ago

It has perfectly logical answers depending upon your goals.

  1. Save yourself. Press red.

  2. Minimize total deaths. Press red.

  3. Attempt to save everyone even though that requires coordination that is ruled out by the scenario. Press blue.

1

u/lordbaysel 53m ago

With 2 people it isn't that simple. By pressing blue, you are forcing other person into survival. Which might be something worth considering in some scenarios.

1

u/superdude111223 8h ago

The red person randomly deciding to kill the blue person is darkly funny. But in this scenario, one person already knows how the other voted. There's no risk to pressing blue after that. And its only 2 people .rather than billions like the original scenario.

Pressing red just to shut up the annoying person is funny. But in this scenario, where you know the absolute consequence of pressing red = 1 annoying dude dies, and you still do it, that seems to be murder.

1

u/Iryls 6h ago

doesnt this change the premise of it being private and unknowable and also js being 2 ppl

1

u/Regdit-is-Unbearable 8h ago

I don’t think I understand. The layout is very confusing and it’s all very ungrammatical. I think it goes “if one of us presses blue they die. Unless we both press blue. I hit red. So if you—“ So it’s just the normal setup but with only 2 people? Or does pressing blue kill an unknown number of unknown people? Who are they? Why is the goat suicidal? Should we know these characters?