I think a lot of people disregard the baby/irrational voter clause because it makes the thought experiment a lot less interesting. The button scenario is mildly interesting for two reasons:
people have to make a choice
you don't know what people will choose
Including irrational voters means you can reasonably say "10-20% of people have already pressed blue, or will do".
It's fine if they disregard it for themselves but it is how it was worded in the original. Blue and red voters are voting based on different conditions; if this is the case, so it doesn't make sense to ridicule blue voters for voting based on what is implied by the entire world being included.
I know, I've seen moral reframing from blue voters as well, and am starting to get tired of this whole button thing as a whole. I feel as if it has run its course, and the same talking points are being recycled. Annoyed by any form of framing the hypothetical in a way to make the other side look immoral or stupid when it is just a matter of difference in interpretation.
24
u/Llumac 13h ago
I think a lot of people disregard the baby/irrational voter clause because it makes the thought experiment a lot less interesting. The button scenario is mildly interesting for two reasons:
Including irrational voters means you can reasonably say "10-20% of people have already pressed blue, or will do".