Written By Hajrah Khawar
Since a very young age most of us have had it drilled into our malleable minds that selfishness equals bad and bad equals something you do not want to experience. Morals against selfishness were delivered subtly and not so subtly. But the point is that selfishness has always been viewed negatively and while in its bliss and glee, you get to be the fairest of them all, it does not last and karma always gets the last laugh, or does it? Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the prisoner’s dilemma which essentially breaks karma.
The prisoner’s dilemma is essential as follows:
● Two bank robbers, Elizabeth and Henry, have been arrested. They are being interrogated in separate rooms.
● The authorities have no other witnesses, and can only prove the case against them if they manage to convince at least one of the robbers to betray their accomplice and testify to the crime.
● Each bank robber is faced with the choice to cooperate with their accomplice and remain silent or to defect from the gang and testify for the prosecution.
● If they both cooperate and remain silent, then the authorities will only be able to convict them on a lesser charge resulting in one year in jail for each (1 year for Elizabeth + 1 year for Henry = 2 years total jail time).
● If one testifies and the other does not, then the one who testifies will go free and the other will get five years (0 years for the one who defects + 5 for the one convicted = 5 years total).
● However, if both testify against the other, each will get three years in jail for being partly responsible for the robbery (3 years for Elizabeth + 3 years for Henry = 6 years total jail time).
Here is a table to visually represent the scenario:
Now the optimal solution for this is that both Henry and Elizabeth remain silent and cooperate with them only receiving 1 year of jail time each. However, there will always be the what if I just defect and get 0. By believing on the basis that Elizabeth’s defects cause the optimum solution Henry could defect and get out of jail for free but then again Elizabeth could be thinking the same thing then. The dilemma forces you into this loophole of thought where you find yourself at square one every five minutes.
According to me, this dilemma does not have any real solution and just simplistically represents the thinking of the human mind: and also to me represents that decision-making is not always so black and white.
The prisoner’s dilemma is represented in many aspects of life and once you start noticing it you’ll see it everywhere. For instance, imagine there are 2 companies: Company A and B. Company A may choose to start advertising and promoting their product to gain more customers than Company B which will essentially make it more profitable than Company B. However, Company B could take the same course of action and spend money all the money on an advertisement with no real benefit. This is just one example, a couple of others will make you think that the prisoner dilemma scenario is wired in our universe.
You as a human being will always think and devise new ways of getting more, whether that be more money, more freedom, more video games, more views, more people to like you, or even more likes. But the flaw is that every other human is fundamentally programmed the same way as you and because of that all of this combined effort will in the end amount to nothing.
The prisoner's dilemma is a complex scenario representing many aspects of life; you can find some for yourself. Representing human thinking is only one of them. Though in the end, it just tells us more about how being selfish can sometimes get good things but most of the time nothing really happens cause here’s the thing everybody already wants the same thing. This is how I interpret the prisoner’s dilemma but it’s interesting to view it from another fellow prisoner’s eyes.
Contact the LINK magazine and tell us about how you see this complex, intricate, and utterly mind-befuddling scenario.
Comentarios