But they could. No society would survive if everyone (or even a large minority of people) decided they no longer wanted to be part of society, there aren’t enough police and soldiers in even the most authoritarian society for that
People don’t because historically society has largely kept them fed and safe and met their other needs, when people no longer think that then society is in peril. That’s the factor thats not modelled by this kind of one off game theory dilemma with no history considered. It’s an interesting thought experiment, but that’s all. You can’t draw conclusions on how real society works from it.
Granted, things are bleaker now. But I feel the blue button mindset is what’s holding this country together. If Trump refuses to leave when his time is up, we will see who prevails in the ensuing chaos.
I don’t think it’s accurate to characterize red button pushers as selfish or transactional. I agree that selfish people will pick the red button – full stop. However some perfectly fair-minded people will look at the choices, make a guess at the results, and conclude that red is the best option. They may hope, or assume, that most everyone will see it this way as well. They understand some people will choose blue, but believe they can’t save them. There is no malice in those options.
The problem as stated gives red a clear advantage to staying alive. Coupled with that knowledge as well as the knowledge that all the jerks will pick red gives a strong probability to blue not getting to 50%. Especially in the privacy of the button pushing tent.
Presumably there will be people that pick at random, misunderstand the rules, hit the wrong button, are too young to decide, too stressed to think clearly, etc. So even with a red result, there will be deaths. It’s understandable then that some people can never choose red, but that doesn’t make the red choosers evil.
To my mind this hypothetical can be simplified to:
Red will exceed 50%
Knowing that, what button do you push?
Some disagree with #1, but I haven’t heard anyone say that knowing that the outcome would be red would change their decision – so its kind of moot. Then the hypothetical simplifies to “right before you choose, you personally learn that red has more that 50%, what do you choose?”
When I read the OP my first thought was “obviously blue”, but the more I thought about it the more I realized red was the only way to survive. The reality is that I would choose whatever was best for my family which is probably staying alive.
Same here, especially after reading this thread. And thinking further about our society and human history, we’re likely the descendants of more people that selected red vs. blue. A really great question that feels like a slap in the face at the end. And really, no one actually knows for certain what they will do. I think there are even people that are saying “red”, but will switch to blue at the end.
eta: But more that would switch from blue to red, imho.
Here’s a little thought experiment within this thought experiment:
What if this exact same “game” involved just your immediate family? Again, no discussions allowed and everyone gets 1-minute to make a decision? Surely everyone picks blue, right?
Now expand it to your cousins and their parents? Still blue, right? Now your closest friends too. Still blue? At what point do you abandon the blue decision and switch to red?
I think it ultimately comes down to culture and shared experiences. As this question only involved Americans, it’s not surprising 60% picked red. I am generalizing a lot here, but we’re mostly a spoiled bunch who’ve lived easy comfortable lives. We’ve been brought up to equate success with having more money and more fame than your peers. People around us aren’t extended family (as we factually are), but opponents. Other cultures who have shared painful existences or experiences, or memories of them, might get blue totals well over 50%. We just don’t want to give up our easy pleasurable existence. This is also why, while there are some relatively benign protests, there isn’t open revolt as our country is being stolen from us in front of eyes by a conspiracy . Most of us are still too comfortable. Revolution can’t happen until far more people become uncomfortable. A major recession or depression would do it, but by then it could be too late.
I went back to the OP and checked; and the above is all it says about the polls. Aside from the problem that some in this thread seem to be assuming that “sometimes as much as 60% choose red” means the same thing as “most or all polls show at least 60% choose red”, which it doesn’t: did somebody somewhere in this thread say what polls exactly, and/or what percentages the polls which said fewer than 60 percent gave, and I just missed it?
Why so obvious? Remember in the small group case everyone can survive. If we all press red we all survive.
50 percent of you can pick blue (are you rounding up? That probably matters, 2 of 4 is significantly more likely than 3 of 4) or all of you can press red, those are the outcomes you want
So assuming a 3 person family (all adults with the faculties to understand the problem and the repercussions of their choice), it looks like this…
You choose blue:
Good outcomes: Either or both the other players choose blue. Three out of four outcomes.
Bad outcomes: Neither of the other players choose blue. One out of four outcomes
You choose red:
Good outcomes: Neither of the other players choose blue or both the other players choose blue. Two out of four
Bad outcomes: Only one of the other other players choose blue. Two out of four outcomes
So that sounds bad for red. But we aren’t talking about a coin flip here. How sure are you that at least one of your family members will decide to risk death and choose blue? Sure it’s a higher probability than for a pair of complete strangers, but high enough to risk death over? And then how are your family members handling that same calculation?
Would you still pick blue if, right before you chose, you found out red was going to win? Is your primary motivation that you think blue is likely to have the best outcome? Or that you don’t want do harm?
The same one repeated by the same people? Multiple studies done by different people? Any studies done that got different results? Links to any of these studies?
@Lucas_Jackson, do you have any further information on this?
Given that, I would have a lot to consider. That’s not really enough information. If everyone who was choosing had access to that same outcome, it might affect everyone’s decision. If I was told that not only was red going to win, but that 99.99% of people will choose red, and the the people voting blue knew that in advance of voting, I might choose red.
If I was the only one given access to that information, and that red was going to win by a small margin, I’d probably pick blue. I don’t think I could live with myself knowing I had a hand in contributing to that many deaths. We all die sometimes. (Anecdote: Last night, watching Survivor, I had to turn away when they killed the chicken)
Yes, my primary motivation is that I think blue is likely to have the best outcome. Assuming there was no discussing with others or first-hand knowledge of the outcome beforehand.
ETA: I realize that some of that might seem contradictory, but well, that’s how my mind works. Just being honest.
Let’s try another analogy. Everyone will walk into a room one at a time. In the room there is a cyanide capsule. Your choice is to either take the capsule or not. If more than half the people take the cyanide capsule all of those people will be given an antidote. If less than half the people take the cyanide capsule they won’t be given the antidote and will die. In this analogy not taking the capsule is the same as the red choice in the original post (seen by many as selfish and self-centric). Taking the cyanide capsule is the same as the blue choice in the original post (seen by many as being altruistic and noble). Does this analogy change things for anyone? Would those that previously were pushing the blue button actually take the cyanide capsule in order to hopefully help others that also made that choice?
Re: that last comment. I’m a blue voter, but if I were told red is a certainty, not even close, no way I’m the decider, I’d pick red. But that kind of blows up the hypothetical, doesn’t it?
