Prisoner's Dilemma Application to Problem of Commons
This is an excerpt from the paper...
The prisoner's dilemma is related to the problem of the commons because they both involve individuals or entities which are forced into making choices which affect one another. In an example of the prisoner's dilemma, as presented by David G. Myers, each of two guilty prisoners has three choices--confess and lower the penalty he faces, not confess and take the chance that the other will confess and receive the lower sentence while the first receives a severe sentence, or not confess and hope the other does not confess as well in which case both will receive the lowest sentence possible. As Myers writes, "This dilemma often raps each one in a maddening predicament in which both realize they could mutually profit but, mistrusting one another, become 'locked in' to not cooperating." Most importantly, with respect to the question of the commons, "In such dilemmas, the unbridled pursuit of self-interest can be detrimental" (Myers 570). Applying the prisoner's dilemma to the commons, Myers writes that individuals and nations are in the same predicament--they are forced to make decisions and take actions which can either improve their respective positions with respect to the environment and limited resources or make those positions worse. Myers defines the commons as "air, water, whales, cookies, or any shared and limited resource" (571) which will be affected by the decisions and actions of the entities which use that resource: "If all use the resource in moderation, it may replen
. . .
on and declare that this is not the way that human beings should live. moral philosophy seeks to express views which will change the selfish behavior of human beings, either through persuasion or coercion. Laws prevent people from stealing or killing whenever they have the impulse to do so--or at least prevent most people from doing so.
In any case, says Baxter, the way things are is the only way things can be because "I do not know how we could administer any other system" (201). Again, this is the same as saying that people naturally kill and steal, and that is the way it must remain because it would simply be too difficult, or impossible, to administer a system which would change the way things are. His suggestion that individuals decide everything that happens in the world by democratic vote (201) is preposterous. This writer does not remember ever voting for or against murder, but the laws are nevertheless on the books against this crime. If a man in his house decides to fill it with poison because that is what he wants to do, does that inclination make it acceptable, especially when he will kill his whole family along with himself. The analogy can be extended to the environment. If the United States and other developed nat
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
David Myers, Immediately Baxter, Maclaine Penguins, Devall Sessions, Mexico City, Contrary Baxter's, William Baxter, , prisoner's dilemma, moral philosophy, People Penguins, decisions actions, Deep Ecology, tragedy commons, prisoner's dilemma commons, devall sessions, biocentric equality, administer system, myers writes, dilemma commons, principle biocentric equality, baxter's argument,
Approximate Word count = 1637
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page)
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
