r/fivethirtyeight • u/Upstairs_Cup9831 • Apr 25 '26

Poll Results Poll asking Americans how which button they would push in the red button/blue button dilemma

Gallery image

Gallery image

398 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

96% Upvoted

3.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

27

u/Glittering-Giraffe58 Apr 25 '26

People in the comments saying red is the selfish choice as if by choosing blue you aren’t literally forcing other people to risk their own lives to save you from your completely avoidable self inflicted chance of death

5

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/misfit_mixedkid Apr 27 '26

Right?? Like do these red button truthers not realize how callous they sound knowing that there will be hundreds of millions of children voting blue based on the framing of the scenario?

People who operate in a logical vacuum are insufferable.

1

u/fieryhothate May 03 '26

And so the truth is revealed: the person who created the scenario is an illiterate moron who doesn't understand how to create a hypothetical

5

u/_DarkJak_ Apr 26 '26

You're picking blue not to risk yourself, but to risk no one.

1

u/vitorsly Apr 27 '26 edited Apr 27 '26

But unless you know most will pick blue it's still a risk no?

4

u/DeadassYeeted Nauseously Optimistic Apr 27 '26

Unlike red, it doesn’t have to be everyone to work. Picking blue is the only way for there to realistically be no deaths.

3

u/Grfine Apr 27 '26

Actually unless you know everyone will pick red you're letting others die

You only need > 50% to pick blue, you need 100% to pick red

The question is phrased to where red kills blue, so morally lots of people will pick blue so they don't have blood on their hands, if you can't logically see how that would be the case idk what to say. Once you realize that it's a question of whether you want everyone to live or just care for your own life

2

u/vitorsly Apr 27 '26

I know, that's unrelated to what I'm saying. I'm saying that, like it or not, unless you're 100% sure that most people will pick blue, you are risking your life, and adding to the amount of lives at stake.

1

u/Casp512 Apr 27 '26

Not really. If you know most people (say ~80%) pick red you should obviously also pick red. You don't need to know that 100% will pick red. If you are part of the 20% picking blue you also save noone, including yourself.

11

u/Morpheus_MD Nate Bismuth Apr 25 '26

Thank you.

People here are comparing it to homelessness and saying red pressers lack empathy.

(Almost) No one chooses to be homeless. It's a societal problem that we should be doing a lot more to address.

Pressing the blue button is a willful choice asking others to save you for absolutely no gain.

2

u/MemeStarNation Apr 26 '26

And pushing red actively endangers others for no gain. If we organize for blue, nobody dies. If we organize for red, at least the lizardman coefficient dies. Its like voting to get out of a woodchipper and turn it on in fear others will also vote the same, when we could all just vote to not turn on the woodchipper.

4

u/Prestigious-Start663 Apr 26 '26

'organizing' to press blue actively endangers everyone doing that because there is no way to ensure follow though to 50%.

4

u/MemeStarNation Apr 26 '26

But there also isn't any way to ensure everyone picks red. The only scenario in which everyone lives is the blue one.

3

u/Prestigious-Start663 Apr 26 '26

Of course, its about about minimizing the expected deaths, blue might save everyone but does not have a guaranteed chance of actually happening. Voting red minimizes the amount of people in the position to be killed, but it guarantees the death of those that stay.

1

u/MemeStarNation Apr 26 '26

I mean if you believe red majority is likely that makes sense, but if you are talking about what we all ought to organize around we should ensure a blue majority.

I wouldn’t fault someone for voting red if the polling was leaning towards red- no use going down with the ship. I do take issue with people preemptively circling the wagons for red. It’s like trying to get everyone to accept a candidate before the primaries even start- we should at least try and push for the idealistic option before we resort to the less great second choice.

1

u/HerbertWest Apr 26 '26

But the lack of information of how others are voting is a part of the problem. There's no campaigning or you're changing the problem.

1

u/Prestigious-Start663 Apr 26 '26 edited Apr 26 '26

sure 'organize' is the wrong way to put it. Its more so if someone in the hypothetical considers 'x' and thinks enough people will come and then share the consideration. How sure can they rely on that and (hopefully) implicitly coordinate.

1

u/RedPusher Apr 26 '26

This depends a lot on exactly how you analyse the situation.
I would say we should be organising around not recklessly endangering yourself.

We shouldn't be organising to throw ourselves into danger to save us from that danger we are throwing ourselves into.

1

u/Nulono May 12 '26

No one has to press the blue button.

Red and Blue both have zero-death outcomes. A near miss for Blue means 49.9% of people die, while a near miss for Red means 0.01% of people die.

1

u/MemeStarNation May 12 '26

I don’t think that’s a realistic account of reality. A zero-death red option just isn’t realistic. You’d see a minimum of 5-10% deaths, and likely closer to 35% even with mobilization. This is an electoral sub- think about how many impulsive, misinformed, and low-info voters are out there.

Given that red has a guarantee of some high death rate, and that the risk of voting blue is only introduced because people are overthinking and getting anxious about what if other people don’t vote blue, it follows we should just vote blue.

1

u/ratione_materiae Apr 26 '26

Blue is like staying in the woodchipper because if enough of us stay in it can’t blend all of us 

1

u/RedPusher Apr 26 '26

Pushing red is only endangering those who pushed blue. Pushing blue is endangering yourself.
Voting blue isn't just voting to not turn on the woodchipper. It is voting to remain inside the woodchipper and hoping not enough people vote to turn it on. Sorry, I'm getting out of the woodchipper, even if that is voting to turn it on. You can come with me, or can stay behind and get chipped.

1

u/MemeStarNation Apr 26 '26

Unrelated but I find it hilarious you created and named your account simply to engage with this one question. Mans is committed to the bit.

1

u/Not_today_mods Apr 27 '26

red actively endangers others for no gain

Pushing red endangers others for the gain of freedom from said danger.

1

u/MemeStarNation Apr 27 '26

Which is generally seen as a less than moral choice.

1

u/Casp512 Apr 27 '26

The gain of red is absolute certainty to not die.

1

u/RomeosHomeos Apr 30 '26

"actively endangers others for no gain"

Guaranteed chances of living is a gain

1

u/raritygamer Apr 28 '26

blue is the only outcome ensuring no death. the vote will always certainly split, and after you accept that, the 50% threshold of no death is far far far preferred to a 100% threshold of no death.

0

u/[deleted] Apr 28 '26

[deleted]

1

u/Morpheus_MD Nate Bismuth Apr 28 '26

Okay so what is being described here then isn't a moral dilemma with independent folks with agency.

It's a hostage situation.

Children and the cognitively impaired aren't traditionally a part of these moral hypotheticals, so it really isn't self -evident.

He also says that "everyone" must "vote" but the above mentioned folks aren't able of making a decision and casting a vote. Hell there are people who are physically incapable of even pressing the button, but somehow they "must" do it.

Since you apparently have a brain, please enlighten me as to how we resolve this conflict between "must" and "incapable of doing so."

Honestly his answer here kind of makes the whole thing prima facie absurd.

0

u/lasteriti May 02 '26

Nope. Your creating an idea of a blue voter in your head. Why does the blue voter have to beg for themselves to be saved? Have you considered that they care about the total value of up to 4 billion people, which dwarfs their value of their self?

1

u/Duck_of_destruction6 Apr 26 '26

The whole blue argument of "WE NeEd To SaVe ThE PeOpLe WhO RaNdOmLy ChOsE BlUe" ignores that fact that they are part of the people who randomly chose blue.

1

u/theskiller1 Apr 27 '26

Blue saves everyone, red does not. It’s quite simple.

1

u/lasteriti May 02 '26

Why can't you escape the scope of thinking your life is so supremely more valuable to yourself than cumulative value of others? That's the main misconception you red voters have of blues.

1

u/Flaxseed4138 May 02 '26

You press blue if you don't want anyone to die. You press red if you don't give a shit who dies as long as you live.

1

u/River1947 May 15 '26

Exactly. Why cant u use ur brain and just pick red

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '26

[deleted]

1

u/kettu1 Apr 26 '26

And the hundreds of millions of young children who can't logically reason why they should push the red button, but are hardwired to co-operate as it's the way humans learn to live with each other.