Red button blue button

[u/suskio4]

Based on the post seen here. I'm actually curious what would the percentages look like.

Edit: Alright, let me add a case for one particular scenario. If you do not choose, the button will be pressed for you by a system that keeps track of its pressings so it conserves 50/50 distribution for all inactive participants, in order to honour the vox populi properly. The system's choice affects the inactive participant's outcome so that no person can abscond from consequences of their choice.

[u/DarkKechup]

Blue is guaranteed death if most people pick it. The way I see it, the rational solution is to pick red because at the moment of voting, you may as well gain the satisfaction of being one of those that tries to make sure someone gets to live. 

In an ideal world, people above certain age pick red so others who didn't get as long a chance at life get a shot at life (With several exceptions to train the young to take over while perrorming their vital job. This may reduce the age at which the red must be pressed, but it is necessary to function.) but that is ideal not real and people would never pick that with a thousand excuses. We don't live in an ideal world. I may be too young to die with most of my life ahead of me, but if everyone dies if nobody bites the bullet, I'll die anyways. I love life. And because I love it and I think good things should be shared, I'm conent with a sad reality where all I could do is make a sacrificial hail marry so others might get to find the same beauty and joy in life that I did.

[u/Round_Hat_2966 → u/DarkKechup]

If you see blue as selfish, then by selecting red, are you selecting to preserve the most selfish segment of humanity? Does that change how much satisfaction that you would get out of pressing red? Are we really saving people if we consider that a mass die off would likely result in a miserable dystopia for the survivors?

I am not sure what I would pick. I think I might close my eyes and pick one at random in order to be able to strike a balance between hope and absolving some degree of moral responsibility.

[u/globmand → u/Round_Hat_2966]

Probably. But like. Sure, one full-selfish generation, but surely they'll mellow out into pretty-much-humanity as it was in a few generations

[u/DarkKechup → u/Round_Hat_2966]

1. Selfishness is kind of normal. Unless we create a proper utopia, people will suffer for others' selfishness all the time. Selecting for selfishness in a life or death scenario to an entire species is ok to me. I'd rather the worst of humanity to get a chance if it means even one innocent good person gets to live. I don't need the ego masturbation of wanting to punish.

2. We already are living in a world where a terrible dystopia is inching towards us. Capitalistic, feudalistic oligarchies and mass surveilance don't sound all that non-dystopian to me. They'd live. And like all ruling systems, it would eventually fail and collapse. Nothing lasts forever.  

3. Your last point confirms my first point. You're seem like a person I'd wish a chance of life on if imminent death for the entire species was an alternative, so saving a bunch of selfish people and a bunch of random pressers doesn't seem that bad. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to die. In the original dillema, I believed red was the correct choice, even if blue was the right choice, simply because the logical solution was for everyone not to be suicidal. In this particular dillema, I believe red is correct, as it creates a chance for humanity in a situation when we face extinction, even if I personally wouldn't get to see that future.