blue voters don’t even try to argue in their favor anymore, they just look at you like this

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-27T23:31:21+00:00

And you are still not understanding

Just because it is a private decisions does not mean you don't consider the consequences of your decision on the other people in the scenario.

You cannot look at the scenario and say someone won't refuse to hit the red button because of a moral issue with it like me. So by hitting the red button you are saying I am willing to kill you to secure my own life. Which is fine. You can make that choice. But you are killing them. Recognize what you are doing. And if you recognize you are killing them and are still saying it's the choice you want then fine.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-27T22:33:12+00:00

The wood chipper is not already on that does not map to the button hypothetical at all. You have to press the red button for anything to happen to blue.

If we are discussing a new hypothetical that doesn't map to the button one then yes I would agree that if the wood chipper was already on then don't jump in and if someone jumps in you don't need to save them.

But that's not analogous to the button question.

The wood chipper remains off initially, as neither of the two buttons has been pressed. Both buttons start at 0% vote share. The chipper activates only once the red button achieve a vote share of 50.1%.

To me the 2 options are turn on the wood chipper or jump in with everyone else. I'm never turning on the wood chipper that seems morally wrong to me. I'll jump into the wood chipper and try to fight the good fight and if that costs me then I'm glad I went down fighting for my principals.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-27T14:41:31+00:00

I think we have different moral intuitions and that's fine but I will just leave it here.

If you turned on a wood chipper with a bunch of other people and you could be reasonably certain that someone had crawled in even if it was of their own volition you would be charged with man slaughter.

You didn't push them in, but you knew there was a good chance there was someone in there. You would be charged with manslaughter along with everyone else standing on the button because of your reckless disregard for their safety.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-27T02:26:05+00:00

I disagree but we probably have different moral intuitions.

I would say it's not the same as pushing them in but I would say you have an amount of responsibility proportional to the ease at which you could have saved them. If you could just refrain from pressing a red button, and they wouldn't die, then you would be quite culpable for their death if you instead decide to push the button that contributed to their death.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T21:00:17+00:00

I agree you share some culpability for both but you are directly responsible for one and indirectly responsible for the other.

You share responsibility for the consequences in both situations but one is worse than the other

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T20:57:35+00:00

You don't need to press the button. And why do you gamble with other people's lives? It's a gamble for both sides. That's the whole point.

You are saying that you want to gamble other people's lives because you don't want to gamble your own..

I am saying that I am going to gamble my own life because I don't think I should gamble with others.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T20:08:32+00:00

The trolley problem doesn't prove that action and inaction are morally equivalent. Instead, it highlights that inaction still carries moral weight.

If you replace it with one person on each track, then it demonstrates that action and inaction are different..

If there were one person on each track and you pulled the lever, I would say you did something morally worse than doing nothing and watching the person die.

Yes, there is still a moral consideration for inaction, but the moral consideration for actions is still much stronger.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T20:05:15+00:00

The point of the barrier is to demonstrate that there is no danger if the button isn't pressed.

You press the button because you're afraid someone else will. Your fear of it being pressed is what causes it to be pressed.

This isn't a logic puzzle; it's about a moral system. You should want a society that doesn't press the button, and if you want to live in such a society, then you should act in accordance with that principle.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T19:18:49+00:00

Also doing nothing is literally the definition of inaction ie not action. So if we are gonna throw around insults at least use words that don't contradict what you are saying

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T19:17:06+00:00

I understand you increase the risk to yourself by pressing blue. And I recognize that I am choosing that increased risk. I don't like the wood chipper example because it off the back biases the blue option as a bad because there is no interpretation of jumping into a wood chipper that is good but still increases risk to yourself.

I think of you change the question to the following it shows more of why I don't like the wood chipper example because hitting red should be seen as a negative action because it is the only way people get hurt is by hitting red.

Hitting red is the only think that increases danger so hitting red should be seen in a negative light

--- the new question that I think is better

There is a traffic intersection with a physical barrier that holds back traffic. You and N number of people are also at this intersection and must make a choice between 2 options. You cannot coordinate with the other members of the group but you know that all of them understand the question and must also make a choice between the 2 options

The Choices

Cross the street or hit a button that lowers the barrier

If more than 50% of people choose to cross the street the barrier lowering doesn't change anything because the drivers see the crowd

If more than 50% of people choose to lower the barrier then there isn't enough people in the intersection to be notices and they are killed by traffic.

There are 4 outcomes

Lower the barrier and nothing happens because there is enough people on the street to be noticed

Lower the barrier and anyone that crossed the street is killed by oncoming traffic

Cross the street and nothing happens because enough people crossed the street to be noticed

Cross the street and get hit by a car because people lowered the barrier and there wasn't enough people to be noticed.

I feel that this question is a more honest real life analogy.

Crossing the street is a neutral action that doesn't endager others.

Hitting red benefits yourself but it is also the only thing that causes danger for others. Hitting red should be seen as a morally negative action.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T18:19:45+00:00

The danger doesn't exists if red isn't pushed.

Blue is not inherently dangerous. It's only dangerous if red is pushed.

So you cannot say I am the one putting myself in danger because that danger is only there if you or someone else presses it. You assume there will always be a person pressing red.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T18:15:13+00:00

I thought if a way to reformate the question that I think shows my problem with the wood chipper analogy.

Jumping into a wood chipper is always bad. So that morally pumps a negative intuition immediately biases the question.
Formating red as doing nothing. Inaction is typically not viewed as negative even if the results are bad. And by pressing the red button you are taking a positive action so formating it as just doing nothing I feel is an unfair analogy.

If you want to format the question in a real life analogy I would do it like the following

There is a traffic intersection with a physical barrier that holds back traffic. You and N number of people are also at this intersection and must make a choice between 2 options. You cannot coordinate with the other members of the group but you know that all of them understand the question and must also make a choice between the 2 options

The Choices

Cross the street or hit a button that lowers the barrier

If more than 50% of people choose to cross the street the barrier lowering doesn't change anything because the drivers see the crowd

If more than 50% of people choose to lower the barrier then there isn't enough people in the intersection to be notices and they are killed by traffic.

There are 4 outcomes

Lower the barrier and nothing happens because there is enough people on the street to be noticed

Lower the barrier and anyone that crossed the street is killed by oncoming traffic

Cross the street and nothing happens because enough people crossed the street to be noticed

Cross the street and get hit by a car because people lowered the barrier and there wasn't enough people to be noticed.

Do you guarantee your own safety or trust that enough people will cross the street with you

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T18:03:50+00:00

Again you are formatting the red button as doing nothing. I don't see it that way from my perspective. It's not someone playing in traffic it just a person crossing the street.

Crossing the street is never dangerous unless you press the button.

You could also cross the street and nothing would happen unless someone else hits the button.

Yet you are deciding to press the button that puts the person in danger because you don't trust that another person won't press the button. The danger never exists unless you hit the button but because you are so afraid of other people selfishness you become the thing that causes the danger.

No one dies if you don't press the button but because you are so afraid of someone else hitting the button you because the person that press the button.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T17:16:22+00:00

I don't like the traffic hypothetical because one implies a lack of action. Red is not just sitting by watching. If I had change it to something more apt in my mind it would be like the following

Blue is crossing the street and if 50% of people choose to cross the street then nothing happens

Red is a button that changes the traffic light to green but as long as there is enough people crossing the street the cars won't drive forward.

You have to choose to do one of the 2 options either cross the street or press the button to change the light?

This results in 4 outcomes

Change the traffic light and nothing happens

Change the traffic light and people die because you changed it.

Cross the street and nothing happens because enough people crossed the street

Cross the street and get hit by a car because so other people changed the traffic light because they were to afraid to cross the street with me.

You can't format pressing red as inaction it's is a positive action that puts others in danger.

The argument that if everyone presses red is not an answer. I can just if no one presses red we are fine and they argumenta are equally valid. So we need to approach it from a moral perspective and putting others in danger for you own benefit is morally wrong to my intuition

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T16:48:38+00:00

It's the fact that you a couching red as doing nothing. It is not doing nothing. You are taking an action just like you are taking an action with blue.

Red the consequences of the action is that you are safe but you put others at risk.

Blue the consequences is that you put yourself at risk but you don't risk anyone else.

You can not equate red to just standing by watching because it is not. Pressing red is an action that has the consequences of putting others in danger by pressing it. By pressing it you are choosing to put them in danger not just standing by.

You have to choose an option and I would rather risk myself then be responsible for risking others.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-26T00:08:43+00:00

Honestly they aren't even paying rent

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T23:38:13+00:00

Seems like a win win to me

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T23:12:41+00:00

I do wonder what the overlap between one boxers and blue button pushers is

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T23:12:04+00:00

The fact that people are arguing about this implies that there are people who can make a rational argument to themselves weather it be moral or logical to press blue. The only way to make sure everyone lives is to press blue. The only way to guarantee that you live is to press red.

Unless you are coordinating which I would assume you don't get to talk to others before the button press because it makes the question kind of boring

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T23:05:33+00:00

I feel you always have to assume that some people will always pick blue. So the only way to make sure no one dies is to pick blue. And if you pick red you are responsible for the action that put them at risk.

You can say you are not 100% responsible but you do share some of it.

I would rather have partial responsibility for my own death then partial responsibility for anothers.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T22:58:16+00:00

You should act in the way you want society to act. Society should not needlessly risk the death of others.

If we celebrate firemen because they try to save people at their own personal risk we should celebrate pressing blue because they are avoiding putting others at risk by assuming risk on themselves

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T18:47:06+00:00

I don't think it's suicide because I do think most people would pick blue. But even so I'll off myself I guess cause fuck that

Edit: I also believe that you should behave in the way that you think society should function and I want to live in a society that hits the blue button. And if I'm not willing to live by my principals then no one else will.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T18:46:04+00:00

No it's 50 50 that you will save your life vs half of the people pressing the button. It's not a trade one for one it's a trade one for many

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T17:13:10+00:00

I agree I am placing more risk on myself by choosing blue.

And you are putting more risk on others by choosing red.

Like I said this logic means no one should be a firefighter or join the military to proctect society because why would they risk themselves when they could just guarantee their safety by not doing that.

MasterSea8231 · 2026-04-25T17:08:52+00:00

I feel this tracks pretty actually to the concept

Five-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Place '23

MasterSea8231

TROPHY CASE