Thanks @Lucas_Jackson and @Stratocaster. I think either motivation is valid for blue.
The hypothetical turned out to be deeper than I had originally thought. Our choice is really a proxy for what we think of the rest of the population. @Jackknifed_Juggernaut’s alternative take (what if it was just your family, etc.) is interesting to me because my answer would clearly be blue.
Thanks; but I’m not on either of them. Can you tell me if he gives any links to the studies?
I’m sure some will find room to quibble (isn’t there always?), but I think this analogy is a good one.
I could be wrong, but I don’t think you have to ‘be on’ Instagram to view it. Just click the link I posted.
I don’t see any link to Instagram. The only link I see is to facebook. Rather to my surprise I was able to see that. He shows a graph of what’s supposed to be a poll result, but it gives no information whatsoever about the poll; not who was polled, not how many people were polled, not who took the poll, zilch. it isn’t anything remotely resembling a cite of even one poll, let alone a cite of multiple polls.
Its just the Twitter poll in that post I think, so nothing remotely scientific (no different to the polls here on SDMB)…
https://imgur.com/gallery/sxRnzNX
I’d be interested to know if he actually came up with it, and what point he wanted to make if so.
Knowing about it makes it certain, but in the hypothetical, you have to guess how others will act.
I understand that everyone picking blue would be ideal, but the reality is that a certain percentage of people would pick red.
Where the group is large enough, such as a whole country or the world, the chance you are the decisive vote becomes very small.
Sorry, but I didn’t claim it did. I was giving you all of the information about it I had. I suggest googling if you are interested finding out if there have been any scientific studies. This thread is about how you would vote.
OK. But there have been people in this thread posting as if we had multiple well done polls and those provided clear evidence on which they were, and they thought others should, basing their decisions. I’m just pointing out that we have nothing of the sort.
I’m still interested in whether anybody thinks John from post #261 has a responsibility to press the white button. Also whether they’d take the cyanide from #319
I don’t agree that this is a valid analogy. Maybe it is, but the way it is framed doesn’t seem so.
Original button dilemma - do this harmless thing and save people
Cyanide pill - do this dangerous activity and potentially die.
Again, I’m sure someone will point out that they are the same, but human nature being what it is, presentation makes the difference.
How is pressing the blue button harmless? I would say it would be 100% fatal given what I think about human nature in this situation, but even the the most trusting naif would have to admit it carries considerable risk.
You, like many others here, assume that the majority will press red. Until we see an unbiased official poll, I’m not convinced that is true. There is no way to know that blue is "100% fatal ".
As I said I think blue is 100% fatal.but in the post you partially quoted (and then removed the relevant part) I didn’t say YOU should, just acknowledge it is not “harmless”. (whatever percentage chance you think red will win)
I think that’s the point. No one is suggesting everyone’s response would be the same in the poison pill case, just that it should be. Whichever way you slice it ethically, logically, etc. taking the pill is exactly the same as pressing the blue button.
Not if everyone picks red.
More that I think about this game, the more I think about Darwinism. The simple answer is those who do not pick red are to dumb to deserve to win. But if we did not have blue-button pushers then there is no one who will sacrifice themselves for the betterment of society and is that a world we really want?
We’re about to find out. The red button crowd is in the ascendant worldwide.
Interesting point. I wonder if the choice would have been different in, say, the '50s?
I’m pretty sure it would have been, at least speaking only to the USA.
“We’re all in this together” was the central message of the times from the start of the Depression to the end of WWII and in fact into the prosperous post-war boom era too.
Somehow that morphed into “Every sharp-elbowed asshole for himself”, and here we are.