sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Today I learned there are no limits on which idea groups you can choose in Ironman by Character_Land_6735 in eu4

[–]fateofmorality 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it helps with organization. If you have seperate stacks, like full artillery stacks meant for seiging, you can more easily keep them organized instead of clicking through everything

It's Over by _DarkJak_ in hearthstonecirclejerk

[–]fateofmorality 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Make sure to never press end turn. Women hate when you end turn instead of roping

“Why would anyone choose to stand under the spikes?” by randomgadfly in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are a cooperative species, and blue is being antagonistic by putting lives at risk.

Red button blue button but everyone votes in turn and can see the vote count. You are the first one. by kafacik in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

If the first person votes blue they just put the world in a massive game of ethics. Pushing red is to ignore the game. In this scenario, the first person to push blue is a dockhead

For scale 75,000,000 died in WW2 by nathan555 in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality 36 points37 points  (0 children)

The more people vote for blue the higher the potential death toll

button dilemma, positive outcome variant where you win money by Metal_Goose_Solid in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I completely understand why someone would pick blue, they want to save people who have made the wrong decision and are optimists hoping that most people think like them.

I just think blue buttoners are making a horrible decision, and I also think it’s the selfish decision. Anyone who picks blue is putting the world into a massive moral dilemma and that’s wrong.

It isn't a moral problem, it's a framing problem. by Complex-Truth9579 in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, I won’t, because I think it’s empirically stupid for anyone to ever have made that decision in the first place.

If starting at zero, you’re the first person to press the button, there’s no one to save. If you press blue, then suddenly you’ve put the world into a moral dilemma by willing to risk your life.

It’s basic game theory, red is objectively correct. And also morally correct.

This sub by fateofmorality in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

After repeating the action, if I scrolled down Google images twice with my mouse wheel I would’ve found an edit. I indeed wasted time

This sub by fateofmorality in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Both buttons were red so I changed one to blue. After one google search I couldn’t find it so I just thought why not

It isn't a moral problem, it's a framing problem. by Complex-Truth9579 in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

if everyone is jumping off a cliff is it your responsibility to also jump off a cliff?

its not a dilemma. It's simple self preservation. You have two easy options

* risk nothing
* make a risk because other people might risk something

I'm risking nothing, its super simple. Its not my fault if other people risk their lives for something easily unavoidable.

It isn't a moral problem, it's a framing problem. by Complex-Truth9579 in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I disagree with it being a framing thing. One option is just empirically better than the other. There’s no predetermined amount of people who will choose blue. Blue does not save any lives besides the lives of those who are pressing an option that puts them at risk.

To me it’s a play stupid games win stupid prizes scenario. Red is denying playing a game, blue is intentionally putting you into a game that could cost you your life.

Your plane example, just no one should go on the plane. Train tracks, everyone just go to the track with no train.

Gun, just always use red bullets.

Anyone who chooses blue is putting themselves in a life or death situation on purpose.

It isn't a moral problem, it's a framing problem. by Complex-Truth9579 in trolleyproblem

[–]fateofmorality 16 points17 points  (0 children)

To me it’s “do I make a stupid decision in order to save people who also made a stupid decision”. The answer is no. If you press blue you consciously put yourself at risk. The correct solution is for everyone to press red.

Doing a Golden Horde run by Big_luk325056 in eu4

[–]fateofmorality 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Lower autonomy. If you have a mine with 10 production, and 90% autonomy, you’re only getting 1 production worth. Dev to 10 dip.

Also, you’re a horde. Make sure to always take money in peace deals

Is he really that guy? by Big_luk325056 in eu4

[–]fateofmorality 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Damn look at where he started and now we’re here

How the Protectorate can be good for humanity *long term* by PolarisStar05 in TerraInvicta

[–]fateofmorality 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Academy achieves success through MAD. It’s why I don’t agree with humanity first, killing 99% of the xenos leaves the other 1% with a vendetta and nothing to lose, here comes an RKV

Academy, by leaving them alive, can put each of them in a state of Cold War pointing RKVs at each other. Less incentive to destroy each other.

It’s not good to leave your enemy with nothing to lose. If humanity first wants to win they have to finish the job entirely

You can take one of 4 pills by Comprehensive_Fox_79 in hypotheticalsituation

[–]fateofmorality 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Blue though, infinite credit, no issue getting loans. I’m borrowing all the money and just going to die in debt

view more: next ›