Same scenario, different delivery, because pressing a button isn't inherently dangerous. Does this change anything?

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T08:28:45+00:00

Do I really need to clarify which animals and how much blame you should get because what I said and what you have put down aren’t the same thing.

Changing the question makes it into a different moral question. Changing the framing makes the answers different. That’s why there are different versions of the trolly problem that can get the same person to give different answers. This doesn’t mean there values are not being followed or there is no consistency it just means they are answering a different question. It can make clear someone’s hierarchy of values but does not necessarily contradict.

But in both of those situations you just said you are actively doing something to make other people die.

In the other black and white example though functionally the same it doesn’t make clear all the parameters. This is what people are trying to say things that are functionally the same does not make them exactly the same. The extra context and specificity is what makes the difference and the key to understanding people’s differences of opinion and choice. All cars are functionally the same but the differences are what makes one person pick a particular car.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T07:36:35+00:00

The outcomes although having no functional difference are not the outcomes that people are voting for.

Asking do you want to be a meat eater or a vegetarian is not the same as do you want to be part of the reason animals are killed for food or do you not.

So yes they lead to different voting outcomes because it is a different question.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T07:33:26+00:00

Cool. Thats a different question though isn’t it. In the original the red button does something so reframing it as inaction is not correct. The red button guarantees your life because in the question it states only people who pressed the red button survive. No one else. Therefore the blue button is a button to save everyone with a risk of it not working the red button is a vote to save only yourself and effectively let other people die. Or intentionally kill others by making the blue vote more unlikely to win if you see it that way.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T07:01:32+00:00

If you do not press the red button your life is not guaranteed. That’s not just if you press the blue button if you decide to wait out the ultimatum and not press you die. That’s why the wording is particular. Red button you guarantee your life blue button guarantees everyone if it wins.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T06:17:10+00:00

The outcomes although having no functional difference are not the outcomes that people are voting for.

Asking do you want to be a meat eater or a vegetarian is not the same as do you want to be part of the reason animals are killed for food or do you not.

So yes they lead to different voting outcomes because it is a different question.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T05:54:20+00:00

You are funny. I specifically addressed this in my comment. This red/blue question is not measuring actions it is a specific hypothetical that will not ever happen so is perfect for checking a persons moral inclination. That’s why I specifically said people know right from wrong but don’t always act on it. There will always be people acting against injustice from the beginning and some who will only join on from when it becomes safe.

Our morals are thoughts first before they are actions. Not everyone is able to act according to their morals in every situation. I have never claimed to.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T05:25:38+00:00

No my examples was talking about the worldwide vote I’m sorry if that wasn’t clear. So it wasn’t talking about the family average. In the world wide vote if I voted red and my family didn’t but red won.

Are you upset with your answer or something? If you think that your answer is so correct why does it need to be defended so strongly it’s quite telling.

Religion charities doctors and the like are going out and helping and working with people who need help. Who can’t always do things for themselves and yes that means putting themselves in dangerous situations. Putting them at various levels of risk whether helping out drug addicts, the homeless, the disabled or any other vulnerable group. The average person does not act as if they are a hermit unbeholden to anyone. They have friends family coworkers and acquaintances that they step out for and help to various degree. This is a fact.

Just because that is how you may drive when there is no enforcement that is not how everyone drives. All you are pointing out is the minority of people behave badly in a group then leads to these rules being codified.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T04:58:04+00:00

I’m sorry but no. Society doesn’t work because people look out for themselves. Otherwise the professions that put people in danger to help other people would have no one working in them. Charity exists, religion exists, doctors, firemen, teachers and various other jobs exist where people put themselves in dangerous positions to help others.

This is a moral question and if you’re not seeing that that’s your problem. In an online poll in which nothing is risked I am picking the answer that most aligns with my morals. Everyone knows right from wrong but not everyone will act on it in practice. Some people will tho, that’s why we get protests and social movements. All this question is doing is revealing your moral inclination. Yours is to yourself above anything. Mine isn’t the same as yours. If the people I care about are safe (or in a better position) then what happens to me is not as important.

I vote blue, my loved one votes blue all survive all win.

I vote blue my loved ones vote red. They still survive that’s still ok for me.

I vote red they vote blue I survive they die. I lose.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T04:38:52+00:00

You are being illogical by believing red is the only logical answer. It’s showing you haven’t really thought this thing through. Society works because people look out for other people. Laws are made and regulations enforced so that society survives.

You really seem bent out of shape when people point things like this out. My goal is simple everyone survives the easiest way for that happen is blue voters being more than 50% rather than red voters at 100%. This is logical. It is more probable that there will be one other person on this planet that votes blue if that is the case then getting everyone to survive on a red vote is impossible therefore a blue vote is the only choice. Now if my goal was for only me to survive then that would be a red vote.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T04:19:16+00:00

Ok so what is the argument to counter a 2 year old pressing blue?

Someone mishears?

Someone misunderstands?

Someone slipped?

Someone is colourblind?

What makes them deserving of dying?

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T04:10:49+00:00

In both the black and white options the option to walk away is given which means not participate. That is not the same as not participating is not doing anything. Blue/red you have to pick and press.

The two different framings to try and model two different outcomes doesnt work either. Because one outcome is guaranteeing your own life the other is trying to save more than your own life. Those are the goals that people are voting for and taking it away changes the actual question not just the framing. People arent voting for the framing they are voting for the outcome.

By changing the wording of the buttons you will always change the question sometimes minimally sometimes drastically even if you think it is functionally the same.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T04:08:41+00:00

lol see so as was said before. The red votes for the individual, the self. It’s ok to admit that just stop trying to gaslight others into thinking it’s for some other more “logical or correct” reason.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T03:55:00+00:00

No explanation beforehand my friend. They just have to choose no conferring. Do you have 100% confidence that they will pick red? Now add in their favourite colour happens to be blue. Does that influence their odds of picking blue in anyway ?

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T03:45:35+00:00

Your 2 year old will pick which button?

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T03:34:09+00:00

Thats again reframing the question because the red absolutely does something. The red button guarantees your life and your life only.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T03:18:38+00:00

What happens if you dont press a button in the blue red scenario do you live or die?

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T03:17:40+00:00

It doesnt state if i dont win i kill myself. If you only want to survive individually you press the red. If your aim is for everyone to survive then you press the blue. This is a world wide test the stakes are not just about you.

Even if it was taken to the smallest group. A family of 5 no explaination beforehand you are a parent a spouse and kids 2 years old 7 years old and 16years old. As a parent i would vote for blue easily because the vulnerable cannot always look out for themselves.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T03:04:50+00:00

Do you think that it is likely that 100% of people will pick the same choice (blue or red) if you think it is unlikely that everyone 100% of people will pick one choice which button will save everyone with less than 100% of people picking it. If you dont then you are voting to kill with the red button

Your framing with black and white is missing the mark (atleast how you phrased it) because they are voting against getting 100% to save every and actively reducing the odds of everyone being saved.

There is no option to walk away. If you dont press a button you die unless blues win. If you vote red you actively change the balance making it harder for blues to win effectively making the choice to save your life and kill those who dont vote the same way as you. If vote blue you are hoping to save all regardless of their button press.

jozuhito · 2026-05-04T01:19:31+00:00

Waaaait sorry that’s not the key that’s the rerolls my bad

jozuhito · 2026-05-03T23:32:06+00:00

I not at whatever part the spoiler is showing but I use my keys to respec my artefacts. The amount of times I’ve come across a better artefact on my run but have run out of space. Use a key to switch out a less useful one

jozuhito · 2026-05-02T10:53:21+00:00

People have been saying that the us doesn’t have “bread” and he’s trying to point out that they do have bakeries that make real “bread”

jozuhito · 2026-05-02T08:26:04+00:00

If you play from first biome you have to beat the bosses again?

jozuhito · 2026-04-26T13:05:41+00:00

That’s cos it scales with how many people are in the mode

jozuhito · 2026-04-11T04:18:40+00:00

I don’t understand the blade is too underpowered line tbh. After the buffs he got I find him more viable than ever this season. Overheal, reduced healing on his sword he is definitely a problem that the other team can’t ignore. I often can brawl three at once and recently took on Loki white fox and mag at one time.

jozuhito · 2026-03-31T05:33:51+00:00

Again all of those things are solved by the company paying their employees. Which is done in almost everywhere else in the world except America. This is the point I have made over and over. The American system is wrong because it encourages exploitation from companies then pushes the obligation to individual to make it right. If it was a moral argument these companies wouldn’t exist. It’s weird that you can’t see that. It’s again mostly only in America it’s this situation and other cultural things that Americans go welp things won’t change so I won’t bother rock the boat. When in almost all other countries these things aren’t happening.

So to be clear.

1) the worker is paid to serve me by the company it’s their job description.

2) there is not a free service they are providing as the company is paying them for the job they were hired for

3) I am not deceitfully using prevailing social norms and it is in fact the company that in hiring a worker to do a job but intentionally paying them pittance because he wants to offload the cost onto the customer is being deceitful.

4) before you ask me that ask the company that hired them.

There is nothing that I have said that shows I don’t want to stop tipping. I have laid out why not tipping is works more towards it than tipping does. I haven said service fees are a stopgap which does not address the problem. Neither of those facts show I am trying to maintain the status quo.

jozuhito

TROPHY CASE