the red button vs blue button thought experiment is interesting, but it’s already been tainted. The premise of the thought experiment is that you had no possibility to coordinate with others prior to the choice, you have zero information about what others are actively choosing.
but now there’s so much discussion, we know that a lot of people are thinking about choosing blue. everyone wants to agree that the would save everyone. now anyone who would have genuinely in the moment chosen red because they were scared to risk their life, well they say they would choose blue, because it looks like there is no risk! Everyone wants to save everyone! And we all agree!
But actually put yourself in that room. You have no information. You didn’t know this was coming. You have a button that has a chance of killing you, or a button that has no chance of killing you.
I think in that moment, my thought process would be “how many people would vote to save themselves?” And honestly, I think that more than 50% of people, when faced with actual, imminent death, would choose to save themselves. And maybe that makes me a pessimist, but if I want to live (and, personally, I do) then I have to choose the red button.
Or, maybe I think that only 45% of people would go red. Am I willing to bet my life that I am right?
People have varying risk tolerances and value of their life over others and thoughts on how the rest of humanity works. I don’t think anyone is a bad or stupid for picking either button.
And I don’t think it’s a good parallel to anything in real life, because we are not all making social decisions in a box. People coordinate. People talk to one another. People change their actions based on the actions of people around them. There’s also usually more than two choices.
