I'd press the blue button, but I overthought the question too much and now I feel weird about it.
There are two buttons. You must press one.
If at least 50% of the population presses the red button, everyone who pressed the blue button dies.
If at least 50% press the blue button, nothing happens and everyone lives.
At first I thought that pressing the red button demonstrates sociopathy because the red button pushes you towards a chance at Thanos-snapping everyone who thinks differently out of existence. “I pressed the red button because I want to share the world only with people who would make similar decisions.” The blue button is the only way of contributing toward the outcome where everyone survives.
But of course there are innocent, understandable reasons to prefer the red button: it’s the only way to guarantee your survival no matter what others do.
But there's some nonintuitive complexity here underneath. I mean sure, surviving a red button press tells you something about yourself, but surviving a blue button press leaves you in a world where you know as a matter of fact that most people would have pressed the blue button. Red button pressers don’t have the luxury of ensuring this outcome; they only get to push toward it.
So, which is more important: ensuring your survival or verifying a fundamental truth about the world?
Which is more closed-minded: taking action toward ensuring most people around you think similarly? Or instantly teleporting yourself into a world where that property is already known, and declaring that you couldn't live otherwise?
If anything, pressing the blue button allows you to conclude that most people share your world view. If you had pressed the red button, either you now inhabit a sparser world full of prisoner's dillema defectors, or you have to bear the burden of knowing your own defection places you in the minority.