Mr. Philosoraptor.s5
Region: US
Saturday 09 May 2026 17:46:10 GMT
12781
920
170
56
Music
Download
Comments
kyster04 :
why do we think this question applies to children...
2026-05-10 10:28:13
43
Norvio :
“i press red button” dumbass, you pick red, kill half the population and then die anyways since society wont function. WHAT NOW, SHERLOCK? YOU HAVE SO MUCH FUCKING SURVIVAL INSTINCTS, I CAN ALREADY SEE YOU FUCKING SURVIVING FOR 10 MORE MINUTES. i swear to god, red pressers are not real
2026-05-10 22:41:47
8
. :
You didn’t disprove the dilemma, though. Your whole argument depends on “humans are generally cooperative,” but large-scale coordination problems aren’t destroyed by average behavior, they’re destroyed by enough defectors. If blue requires near-perfect cooperation, then even a small percentage of panic, selfishness, trolling, misunderstanding, distrust, or contrarian behavior collapses the entire system. That’s the actual point of the dilemma. Also, you misrepresented game theory. Nash equilibrium doesn’t assume identical rational robots with the same logic. Modern game theory already accounts for irrationality, altruism, religion, emotion, and mixed populations. And the Piaget point barely changes anything mathematically because children are not the deciding factor in the equilibrium outcome anyway.
2026-05-09 17:57:19
10
mlvh010 :
blue i have faith in humanity
2026-05-10 15:47:11
50
andrea :
As a blue button presser, an interesting question I was asked is would I still press blue if it was 90% needed instead of 50% and the answer is no bc I dont have that much faith in humanity. But it made me think that it would be interesting to do another vote where the question is would you press red or blue if the blue votes needed to save everyone are 10%. That would then show if red button pressers are scared bc they dont believe 50% of people will press blue or do they think logically for their own survival without any emphaty. Bc the arguments I heard for red would still apply if the treshold was 10%?
2026-05-09 20:24:10
13
sinox130 :
the dilema: red button :0% death blue button : "random"% death the problem with the dilema is not the fact of morality, is the complexity, they make it look more complex to make u think there is morality in this vote, but in fact, its obvious that blue is the moraly correct decision, but at the same time its not about helping people, its about gambling ur faith in humanity
2026-05-10 20:17:42
1
!!! :
i like your take, some question givers say, 'everyone capable of fully understanding the question', id like to ask, does your thinking change with that condition?
2026-05-12 23:39:44
1
sunth_nord :
Yeh no you’re applying real world logic like kids having to choose without understanding if something is able to somehow force the entire world to play this game then they would have the ability and a reason to allow kids to understand the question or else let’s say for some reason they don’t then that means outside factors would be able to click the button due to this realism that you’re to add the motive for the question is morality and baby’s don’t really have that yet so for the question to be answered then they would need a basic understanding of the question also if you would try to argue this then I could just say ohh well there baby’s that can’t reach the button then what if nothing can be changed and it all must apply to real world at worst the question still requires understanding to actually answer also this isn’t science like at all it’s still a philosophical argument you’re making.
2026-05-09 18:18:47
1
Noah :
I think you are mixing up “human cooperation” with what this scenario actually is. Most studies showing humans cooperate involve things like communication, repeated interaction, social pressure, accountability, trust-building, reputation, etc. This scenario removes almost all of that. You are completely isolated, anonymous, cannot coordinate with anyone, and your own life is directly on the line. That’s why to me this doesn’t feel like normal cooperation, it feels like blind faith that enough strangers will independently risk themselves too. So when you say “humans have proven we cooperate over self-preservation,” I don’t think those situations map cleanly onto this one at all. I also think saying “all children age 5-12 would press blue” is a massive assumption. Kids are not a hive mind, and they vary hugely in fear, trust, empathy, impulsiveness, and understanding of risk. I can absolutely imagine many children instinctively pressing blue because they process it emotionally or morally rather than strategically. But saying red “wouldn’t make sense” to them is wrong too, because even young kids understand self-preservation and danger surprisingly early.
2026-05-10 13:50:54
6
Interpoopinarypoopanol :
red = live blue = maybe live
2026-05-10 15:19:21
51
Mini Diogenes :
This is a major leap from concrete operational to all children will choose blue. It's also a fallacy of generalisation, not all children would press blue.
2026-05-09 21:23:18
7
Caine :
I picked blue because I understood it was more likely for people to pick blue because humans are a species that works better together, that’s inherent knowledge I had going into it. Plus it’s statistically much more likely for 50% of people to do something than 100%
2026-05-10 22:43:56
1
Prometheus :
At extreme tail events such as the blue-red button hypothetical, the strongest desires would be purely to survive. An organism lives solely for continuity and minimizing prediction error, and that happens to align with cooperative desires; which may not align in this tail scenario. Studies that indicate otherwise usually don’t take into account most humans can’t abstract scenarios of doom or there’s always wiggle room around what looks like an extremely constrained scenario. Also, there’s no guarantee cooperation would be allowed in this scenario, I think the hypothetical assumes its instant choice. Pure odds, most people aren’t risking their life on a coin flip if it truly came down to it. Survival instincts from the hypothalamus, one of the oldest parts of the brain would overwhelmingly kick in; and it’s so old it probably doesn’t even think in odds. Open to debate about your premise however, I’d love to see those ‘studies’
2026-05-10 00:20:59
3
Prince Bobby 🐍 :
The original experiment suggests that choices are made only by people who are capable of making and executing conscious choices. You are committing the straw man fallacy by attacking a weaker version of the dilemma.
2026-05-10 20:47:07
0
Adam＾o＾ :
"a 5 year old is gonna press the blue button every single time" is straight up wrong bro and also didnt you contradict yourself by saying that the entire group 1.1 billion of children connor vote on the button?
2026-05-10 21:14:25
0
Aronus :
Just press the green button, is objectively better btw
2026-05-10 19:58:49
3
Badmankilla :
the issue is that red and blue isnt "selfishness vs cooperation"
2026-05-10 02:14:35
1
kuba ( :
You’ve started talking about science just to say that 100% of 5-10 kids will choose blue button 😭🙏😭
2026-05-15 16:54:05
1
. :
there are over 8 billion people if i was presented with the buttons i would know my individual choice wouldn't change whether the 50% threshold was met or not so i would pick red because there's simply no benefit in picking blue
2026-05-10 21:48:26
1
Mister_Gentleman345 :
Still pressing red 🤷
2026-05-10 17:45:42
2
Moth :
great video Mr. philosoraptor
2026-05-09 18:03:18
3
Cognition :
sonion😭😭
2026-05-09 21:09:39
3
Vivi :
I would close my eyes spin then press a random button tbh
2026-05-10 22:32:55
1
To see more videos from user @therationalanimal, please go to the Tikwm
homepage.
![[WUCV3] [Tặng Charm] Dép Sục W#depsuc #depdep #depcross #depnamnu](/video/cover/7653789987342716167.webp)
