top of page

Why We Shouldn't Be Too Desperate -- The Russian Roulette Fallacy

Updated: Jan 11


A grim mobster


Introduction


Russian roulette is a risky game of chance in which you risk your life in exchange for something. Sometimes, there may be more than one reward. It can range from money to the respect of your thrill-seeking peers. Nonetheless, in its original form, you are shooting yourself while worrying about death or serious injury.


Basically, you put a single bullet into a revolver (a repeating handgun), spin its cylinder, and begin the game. The game ends when one of the players eventually shoots themselves.

(There is a cutscene I found about Russian roulette. I will link to it at the end of this article).


Analysis


Instead of lambasting this practice, I will try to understand it from a logical perspective. In philosophy, we do not only preach what we think is true. We also try to understand the other side, to better understand reality.


I find thrill-seeking to be unreasonable when it can greatly risk lives. However, I believe I can decipher the motivations.


Firstly, people do extreme stuff for its own sake, AKA, to be excited. It's reasonable to assume that some people may have this urge more than others. Perhaps it's one of the reasons we're so unusual to each other, especially when it comes to me. Extreme sports? Tourism in dangerous places?


Please keep in mind that people have their own reasons. Reasons that you might not be aware of. Maybe you won't even try to understand deeper; I don't know.


Secondly, thrill-seeking activities may be done professionally. In other words, it could be because it provides employment. Every job respects its holder, as the saying goes in Hebrew. I do not entirely agree with it, but my point is, people are making a living out of people's urge to do such things. As for Russian Roulette, some people might survive by gambling, or seek to earn even more.


Thirdly, there is a contemporary philosophy called FOMO, which stands for the fear of missing out. Its reasoning is that "we only live once," and thus we should experience as much as possible before we die. Some people might desire to play Russian Roulette because they want to experience a life-threatening risk such as this.


Finally, you might want to prove your worth to your friends in order to impress them and avoid being labeled a coward. Therefore, you may conform, or otherwise you would be rejected from their social circle. As said in a previous article, the fear of rejection is perhaps one of the biggest fears in our minds. Even if that fear may be very irrational, yes. It depends on the situation and what will happen if we get rejected.


To play Russian Roulette by choice is obviously irrational. Your life is more important than any of the reasons I just explained. How come? We are all useful in our own ways. Excitement, money, FOMO, or rejection. None of these are good reasons to put a partially-loaded gun to your head. Even if you complete the game, it is not worthwhile.


Even the reward. Do consider the temptation to do it again, just for the adrenaline rush. Do remember, that it can be addictive. It's addictive nature is implied in our brains' reward system. A successful series of rewarding experiences could lead to the victory fallacy, but I digress.


People may claim that we have dangers in our lives anyway. That we can get into a car accident just by walking. That's just one example. When we realize that we don't have to increase our risks any further, the fallacy of this argument becomes clear. We can even fall in our homes, for example, and suffer an injury. It does not mean we should put a revolver to our heads.


The Fallacy in Question

By ruminating on this subject, I came up with a fallacy I'd like to call the Russian Roulette Fallacy. It means that desperation and possible lethal chances, do not justify the execution of lethal activities. I'm specifically stating desperation because it is hard for me to believe that all players in that game are completely serene. Maybe some are too light-headed to understand or care. It does not mean the rest are not as well. The mentioning of lethal chances, as justification to commit lethal activities, as reason, is but an example of the common Whataboutism fallacy.


What causes people to be that desperate? Perhaps they live in poverty and struggle to make ends meet. Therefore, they might gamble to get the money they might never get otherwise. However, the problem with this logic is that they can already try to make money through other means of gambling, which is not as dangerous.


A weird but possible third reason can be this: They must do it. What if you are kidnapped by a group of terrorists and are required to play a game of Russian roulette for freedom? It could be several games as well. Of course in such scenarios, the only thing you have to lose is your chance of freedom from captivity.


Some people might have nothing to lose. So, they may do just that to meet their demise. They are broken, they have nothing left to live for. Even with all what life has to offer to them, they reject such opportunities, for their mentality remains broken. My mentality is broken as well, hence why I found hope in despair.


The irony in the preceding point is that we may find this gamble irrational, but keep in mind that people may have to do it in order to earn something, such as living another day. getting freed from their own status in life. After all, there are not equal opportunities in the real world.


Conclusion


In conclusion our emotions can blind us from seeing the bigger picture. As a result, we may have regrets, but only after the deed is done. We may fall in love with a woman who isn't interested in us. Maybe she just plays along and will stand in your way whenever she sees fit. I'm not projecting.


The fallacy I devised teaches us this: That we should never be too desperate, or we may die as a result. If we can afford safer routes, and not waste time and resources on more-dangerous routes, perhaps we should pick the former routes, in the name of survival. Physical or otherwise.





And saving money, by finding solutions for yourself, can help you both survive and work towards financial wealth.


Thanks for reading. If you enjoyed it, please click the heart icon below this article. It shows other readers that the article was good.


85 views2 comments

Related Posts

See All

2 comentários


TW Quig
TW Quig
02 de set. de 2024

Your social reasons are not wrong, but IMO they leave out the biggest one: Instinctual reasons. We evolved in a world filled with predators and hazards--including of course other humans--that could end our lives on a moment's notice. The degree of safety and security we have today is, instinctually, unnatural. You are right that some adapt to it better than others, but the characteristics that allowed us to survive over millions of years are the ones you critique.


Some of us, me included, find a life without risk subjectively meaningless. Those who content themselves with white piket fences and social intrigue are welcome to them, but they lull the most vital parts of me to sleep.


Parenthetically, I use the…

Editado
Curtir
Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein
Mr. Tomasio Rubinshtein
02 de set. de 2024
Respondendo a

Thanks for commenting.


I agree about the importance of risk. Some risks really should be taken, otherwise, we'll only stagnate ourselves unnecessarily.


A balanced approach really seems to be the right one in many issues, including this one.

Curtir

Tomasio A. Rubinshtein, Philosocom's Founder & Writer

I am a philosopher. I'm also a semi-hermit who has decided to dedicate my life to writing and sharing my articles across the globe to help others with their problems and combat shallowness. More information about me can be found here.

20240819_131418 (1) (1).jpg
bottom of page