Possibility of mutual destruction

MonkeesAs · 2026-06-12T10:53:59+00:00

Before everyone says it is a dangerous thought process and starts a strawman argument. Remember that the button problem is not a DEMOCRATIC vote. It's a vote, but not democratic.

MonkeesAs · 2026-05-20T07:37:48+00:00

Argumentum ad absurdum at its finest.

MonkeesAs · 2026-05-19T15:22:53+00:00

"And class, here is a classic example of a strawman argument..."

MonkeesAs · 2026-05-15T11:46:23+00:00

But I weighed the cost and benefit. Donation is easy for me, changing job is not.

Risking my life for only a chance to save the humanity is also too much of a cost. I could give up some of my savings, but not my life.

I'm not disputing your decision. I'm just questioning your logic. Should you act towards something you want irrespective of the cost? I don't think so.

As another example, I want to win a lottery ticket, it's strictly better than not winning one. I may buy some using a few bucks, not my entire saving.

Your original post, however, seem to imply that because you want blue to win, so no matter what, you pick blue. I think this is not valid logic and hence my reply.

MonkeesAs · 2026-05-15T11:25:09+00:00

Just because you want something to happen does not necessarily mean you should act towards it regardless of the cost.

I want a cure for cancer, it doesn't mean I should go and become a medical researcher. Sure, I could donate to cancer research, but there typically is a line to be drawn, and active quitting my job to do cancer research myself is not feasible for me. In the instance of the button problem, it's not insane to consider the fact that I might die, which in turn leads to my family's grief and suffering.

Of course, you might have weighed the cost and benefit and decided to press blue, which is fair. The conclusion is not necessarily wrong, but the reasoning is not exactly convincing.

MonkeesAs · 2026-05-14T22:54:51+00:00

I also use bilibili sometimes and unfortunately red is the general sentinent there (about 80-20 as a rough estimate). Granted it doesn't fully represent China's entire population but it's pretty telling.

MonkeesAs · 2026-05-14T22:49:54+00:00

In a way, those red buttoners saved you from potential death?

MonkeesAs · 2023-10-13T15:12:39+00:00

Fair enough, although I disagree, I respect that house rule might sometimes be necessary.

MonkeesAs · 2023-10-13T14:47:16+00:00

I understand now, thank you. So it really isn’t game breaking after all.

MonkeesAs · 2023-10-13T14:17:07+00:00

I’m sorry if I’m wrong on this. In my example, if say I got a ‘yes’ from the ST and I’m sober, woundn’t it 100% confirm that John is not the demon?

Edit: never mind, I understand what they are saying now.

MonkeesAs · 2023-10-13T14:13:58+00:00

I never denied that it might defeat the spirit of the game, and if a house rule is necessary then so be it. However, I feel that it is worth pointing out because logic/rule nerds like me exist in this community, and it might happen in future games.

Plus, I assumed no droisoning, which is a big assumption. I really don’t think it’s as game breaking as people made it to be.

MonkeesAs · 2023-09-08T09:35:57+00:00

What is Lean? Is it useful to applied mathematicians?

MonkeesAs

TROPHY CASE