Prisioner Dilemma

PRISIONER DILEMMA The prisoner's dilemma is one of the most well-known illustrations of why people can act the way they do. The prisoner's dilemma is actually part of the game theorem, a field of mathematics that looks at the various outcomes of situations that require strategy. However, the prisoner's dilemma far above is just a mathematical idea. This raises important questions about morality, psychology, and philosophy, and can even obscure the real world. THE ORIGIN OF THE PRISONER'S DILEMMA In 1950, the RAND Corporation hired mathematicians Merrill Floo and Melvin Dresher as part of their ongoing investigation into game theory and how it could be applied to global nuclear strategy. Based on the puzzles provided by floods and disasters. Princeton professor Albert W. Tucker tweaked their work to make it more accessible to the masses, thus creating what is now known as the prisoner's dilemma. THE DILEMMA OF A LANDOWNER Two prisoners, detainee A and detainee B, were detained. The police didn't have enough evidence, so they decided to put A and B in separate rooms. The police told every silent prisoner that he could leave freely while prisoners who remained silent would face jail time. If A and B confess, they will both be imprisoned (although the sentence is shorter than that faced by people who do not speak). If prisoners A and B remain silent, they will both face a shorter prison sentence. Example: According to this diagram, if prisoner A and prisoner B confess. They will each have to serve six years. If the quiet prisoner A confesses (which has implications for prisoner A in the process, prisoner A must be imprisoned for ten years while prisoner B can go home. For example, if prisoner A confesses but prisoner B remains calm, then prisoner B goes home while prisoner B faces ten years in prison. Lastly, if the two regents calm down, they will each face two years. Another way we can look at this is: PICTURE PAGE 55 C represents player cooperation (in this case, remain silent) and D represents a player who defected (confess). R stands for the prize that the players will receive if the two decide to work together; P describes the punishment that both players receive for defecting: T is the temptation that a player has if they defect alone; And finally, S represents his "sucker" of results that the player will have to work on his own. What does Dilemma mean in prisoner's dilemma is this: prisoner A and pris B better confess; However, if both confessed, the end result would be much worse than if bothhad remained silent. The prisoner's dilemma is a perfect illustration of the conflict that arises between groups of individual ratininess and rationality. If a group of people act rationally, they will actually do much worse than if a group of people act irrationally. In the prisoner's dilemma, it is assumed that all players are rational and know that the other players involved are rational. The rational mind will be flawed. But by choosing to protect themselves and act in their own interests, the prisoners will be worse. Some are moving now. Let's add another option, tc, games. Players now have the option of defecting, cooperating, or not at all. We see that defecting is no longer the dominant choice, and that piayers would actually be better off choosing to cooperate if the other players chose not both. Several players and Tragedy with the Structure. Prisoner dilemmas can arise in larger sets, such as large groups or even societies. This is where we see how morality works. The best example to show the dilemma of multiplayer inmates is the situation known as the "tragedy of togetherness" In this tragedy of togetherness, a group of neighboring farmers all prefer their cows not to graze on their private property (which is not quite a fit), but in togetherness. However, if the crowd reaches a certain threshold, the land will become public property unsuitable for grazing. By acting rationally (for personal gain) and trying to reap the benefits of land, farmers will deplete land and have a negative impact on everyone. Like the prisoner's dilemma, the rational strategy of the individual creates irrational outcomes that affect the group. So what does the prisoner's dilemma and tragedy tell us about morality? Basically, these examples prove that our demands on self-interest and self-gratification will actually end up self-destructive in the long run. An example of a prisoner's dilemma in the real world A classic example of the prisoner's dilemma in the real world is a serious problem in today's fishing industry. Currently, industrial fishermen are catching fish at a very fast rate. While this seems good for the current advantage, the catch rate of these fish is faster than the amount of time it takes the fish to reproduce. As a result, the number of fish is now depleted, making it difficult for all fishermen. To guarantee the livelihood of the industry in the long term, fishermen must cooperate and not make much profit in the near future (thus, against their own southeast!).