The Intricacies of Choice: My Look Into the Prisoner's Dilemma

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a very interesting philosophical thought experiment I came across that challenges the idea that you can always act rationally and achieve the best outcome.

Originally created by Merrill Flood and Melvin Dresher and adapted by Albert W. Tucker, it goes a little bit like this: Two prisoners are locked in separate rooms with the cops trying to get them to confess. The prisoners have two options here: to stay silent or to confess. If one prisoner confesses and the other one doesn’t, the prisoner who stayed silent serves 10 years in jail while the one who confessed gets to go free at that instant. If they both confess, both prisoners spend 6 years in jail.

However (this is the catch), if they both stay silent, they both only have to serve 2 years in jail. Of course, because there’s a chance that one individual prisoner could serve no time in jail by confessing, the rational action to take if you were in one of those prisoners’ shoes is to confess.

But the reason why this is a dilemma is because the prisoners have a lighter consequence if they go against the rational action to take. Because the prisoners are locked in separate rooms with no communication, they have to act in only their best sense. There’s also a whole nother branch of mathematics involved here, game theory, which delves deep into situations where a group of people will try to win individually through logic, knowing that the others in this “game” are also trying to win.

You might think that the Prisoner’s Dilemma is just a fancy thought experiment that doesn’t help us whatsoever. However, situations in the real world sometimes model the problem. For example, imagine the modern fishing industry, with its thousands of fishers. Every individual fisher wants to increase their own profits by catching more fish, but if they do, they risk catching all of the fish with their competitors. So even though catching as many fish as you can would be the rational choice, it is wiser for everyone to catch less fish now in order for the fishing industry as a whole to sustain into the future. Just like the Prisoner’s Dilemma, it is better to go against the rational choice leading to your individual benefit.

The Prisoner’s Dilemma teaches us the importance of balancing personal desires and achieving the greater good. In fact, the thought experiment manages to break down things that are happening in the real world into a concept that can be understood. After all, in this world, aren’t we all prisoners of our own dilemmas?

Comments

The Evolution of Information in Philosophy and AI

Claude Shannon, often called the "father of information theory," developed a groundbreaking way to understand communication. His theory, created in the 1940s, showed how information could be transmitted efficiently, whether through telegraphs, radios, or computers. Shannon introduced the idea of entropy , which measures uncertainty in a message. For example, a completely random message has high entropy, while a predictable one has low entropy. Shannon’s work also addressed how noise, or interference, can affect communication and how redundancy can help correct errors. The formula for Shannon's Entropy illustrates how the probability of each symbol contributes to the overall uncertainty or "information" in a system. This foundational equation in information theory has broad implications in both technology and philosophy, raising questions about the nature of knowledge and reality. (Najera, Jesus. “Intro To Information Theory.” Setzeus, 18 March 2020, https://www...

What is Nothing?

What does it mean for nothing to exist? At first, the question sounds simple, even a little silly. But both scientists and philosophers have struggled with the idea of "nothing" for centuries. Is empty space truly empty? Can “nothingness” actually exist, or is it just a word we use when we don’t know what else to say? In this post, we’ll explore how science and philosophy look at the idea of nothingness—from ancient views of the void to modern physics and quantum theory—and ask whether nothing is ever really… nothing. Nothing in Philosophy: The Ancient Void Philosophers have debated the concept of nothingness for thousands of years. In ancient Greece, thinkers like Parmenides argued that “nothing” cannot exist at all. To him, the very act of thinking or speaking about “nothing” meant that it was something , which made the idea of true nothingness impossible. On the other hand, Democritus , who imagined the world as made of tiny atoms, believed that atoms moved through an ...

Does String Theory Count as Science?

String theory is one of the most ambitious and imaginative ideas in modern physics. It aims to do something no other theory has done: unify all the fundamental forces of nature ( gravity, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, and the weak nuclear force) into a single framework. It replaces point-like particles with tiny vibrating strings , whose vibrations determine the type of particle you observe. But despite its promise, string theory is also one of the most controversial theories, because right now, it can't be tested . So this leads to a deep philosophical question: If a theory explains everything but can’t be tested, does it still count as science? In string theory, fundamental particles like electrons, protons, and quarks are represented as tiny vibrating strings. The type of particle is determined by the string’s vibrational pattern, similar to how different notes come from the same guitar string. Tripathi, A. (2024, March 24). String Theory: Dimensional Implicatio...

Reason & Reflection

Search This Blog