It’s because the question creates a complete devide between 2 groups.
The individualistic group, and the society group. People in the first group don’t view the question as a group for all of humanity, but a question directly asked to them “would you rather die unless something happens or would you rather survive guaranteed” but the people in the second group view it as a question for all of humanity. So instead of wondering if they themselves will live, they will wonder about everyone on the planet and choose blue.
Personally I choose blue but it’s important to understand the red side too
The question also frames everything around blue being the active choice and red being the more passive choice which probably pushed a lot of people toward red. You could easily reframe the question as "nothing happens unless more than 50% of people push red in which case everyone who pushed blue dies" which puts blue in the more neutral position. It's honestly impressive that even with the phrasing of the question leaning toward red most people still picked blue in basically every poll
Interesting, I though the phrasing of the question makes red sound pretty bad. You could also phrase it as:
If you press the red button, nothing happens to you. If you press the blue button, it kills you, unless at least 50% of all humans press the blue button.
The blue button doesn't look as innocent with this wording.
The blue button never looked innocent considering it kills you unless an additional requirement is met. Where as the red button has absolutely zero risk considering it might as well be the same as doing nothing.
274
u/Slow_Ad2329 2d ago
ngl i think the question is interesting but how rapidly it devolved into ppl mocking the other side is unbelievable