u/Greedy_Ad2198

Now that we've determined that all of us are either coldhearted murderers or complete helpless idiots, let's lay this conversation to rest.

#TRANSCRIPT

There's two core assumptions:

50% blue is realistic to reach -> better 0 deaths than any deaths

-> press blue

50% blue is unrealistic to reach -> the more people press blue, the more will die

-> press red

If blue only needed 1% to win, almost everyone would press it, because it's low risk. At that point if you don't press blue, most people will think you're either careless or the biggest hater ever.

If blue needed 99% to win, almost noone would press it, because expecting that to work is unrealistic. At that point if you press blue, most people will think you're either delusional about humanity or simply suicidal.

Where do you draw the line? Do you think 25% (2 billion) people would press blue? 50% (4 billion)? 75% (6 billion)? How much trust do you have?

Which button you press is entirely independent from your morality or intelligence.

It solely hinges on what you think the rest of society will press.

This is all just to say: red pressers aren't evil, and blue pressers aren't stupid.

The buttons don't select for that.

Perfectly nice and altruistic people may have made enough bad experiences to believe there's not enough optimistic people in the world to press blue.

Perfectly well reasoned people may have the faith in humanity to think the opposite.

So stop the tribalism. The original experiment was testing how different framings of the same scenario will sway the majority of people in either direction.

Every post and comment you make that reframes it is demonstrating exactly that, not proving the other side wrong. You're just exposing your assumptions.

I'm seeing a lot of "bluers are irrational and suicidal and have it coming" vs "redders are literally Hitler and I don't want to live with them anyway", so let's keep in mind that the whole reason this debate is so interesting is because there's great arguments for both sides.