The Vs. The Prisoner 's Dilemma

The Milgram study for instance was used to determine the effect that authority can have on ones decision making process. Milgram examined this by setting up a study at Yale University. Milgram set up a control room hooked to a fake electric chair. Milgram then had people turn up the voltage to the chair. Milgram would observe how far he could make the subjects “torture” the others just based off his authority. “Ordinary people are likely to follow the instruction of an authority figure, even to the extent of killing an innocent human being” (McLeod 20). Obedience to authority is first response for most humans. It can directly alter and control the way one makes rational

Ethical dilemmas occur when there is a disagreement about a situation and all parties involved question how they should behave based on their individual ethical morals. (Newman & Pollnitz, 2005). The dilemma that I will be addressing in this essay involves Michael, recently employed male educator working in the nursery, and parents of a baby enrolled at the centre. The parents have raised concerns about male educators changing their child’s nappy as they have cultural practices that do not allow this practice to take place. This situation is classed as an ethical dilemma as there is a dispute between cultural beliefs and legal requirements within the workplace. There are four parties involved (parents, child, educator and director), all

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is an extremely popular game and way of thinking about social interactions and also economics. It judges how people work together and against each other. It helps us understand what governs the balance between cooperation and competition in business, in politics, and in social settings. The two players in the game can choose between two moves, either 'cooperate' or 'defect'. The idea is that each player gains when both cooperate, but if only one of them cooperates, the other one, who defects, will gain more. If both defect, both lose. The whole game situation and its different outcomes can be summarised with the example provided below, hypothetical situations are imagined with the example below

One of the guidelines for experiments is to give participants informed consent. This means that they should be fully aware of the nature of the experiment, and any risks which the participants may be subjected to. In Milgram’s study, he told participants that the experiment was to test human learning through a memory game, which was partially true. In reality, however, the focus point was on obedience to authority figures, and the extent to which people would inflict pain on another individual simply because they were told to. This immediately breaches one of the guidelines, as participants were deceived and the true nature of the experiment was hidden. An issue with deception, however, is it cannot be avoided in all cases in order to provide the results in which the experiment is looking for. For example, if Milgram told

The use of certain tests listed above has some limitations, such as in the change blindness test, we can not say with 100% certainty where the participant have seen changes, and where just click on the keyboard buttons. About this restriction also mentioned Levin, Momen, IV & Simons, they also coined the term "change blindness blindness" which characterizes the misconceptions about the vision due to the fact that some participants in the experiment have given the answer at random trying to guess what was supposed to be the right answer. The motivation to divining the answer may be a desire to look smart and impress yourself and others (2010). In some tests, such as

The Gambling Experiment run by the University of Iowa was a fairly simple experiment. They placed four decks in front of a person, two of them were blue and two were red. They then asked people to pick cards from each deck one at a time. The card could either give the people money or penalize them by taking money away. Also the red decks had more penalties then earning while the blue decks were the other way around. They tested to see how long it would take for people to figure this out and it took about 50 cards for them to have a hunch about the pattern. After 80 cards most people were sure that the red decks were a minefield. The Iowa scientists also

Baumrind fairly claims the “laboratory is not the place” to conduct studies of obedience as the laboratory tends to increase the number of variables above what is desired (Baumrind 90). Science Magazine defends Baumrind’s claim by conducting an experiment directed toward answering the question of the reproducibility of previously conducted psychological experiments. The data collected shows a significant decrease in the strength of the data collected and the number of experiments deemed reproducible was much smaller than those which were reproducible (“Estimating the Reproducibility of Psychological Science”). If the experiment’s results are correct, then Baumrind has fairly contested the integrity of the results of the experiment conducted by Milgram since his results have a stronger chance of not being reproduced in a laboratory than of being reproduced in a laboratory. Milgram adds credibility to his article by mentioning the population from which the subjects were drawn. Initially, Milgram enlists Yale undergraduates to volunteer for his study which led to results consistent with his study, but severely taints the credibility of his experiment. He then modifies his experiment and enlarges to volunteer population to include that of anyone living in the city (Milgram 80-81). His

The ethical theory of utilitarianism and the perspective on relativism, of prison labor along with the relativism on criminal behavior of individuals incarcerated are two issues that need to be addressed. Does the utilitarianism of prisoner’s right laws actually protect them? Or are the unethical actions of the international and states right laws exploiting the prison labor? Unethical procedures that impact incarcerated individuals and correctional staff, the relativism of respect as people and not just prisoner’s; the safety of all inmates and correctional staff, are all issues worth continuous reflection.

Competition and conflict between prisoners definitely worsen the life in camp. Shukhov once stated “Who’s the zek’s main enemy? Another zek. If only they weren’t at odds with one another --ah, what a difference that’d make!”. The men did not really form a close relationship with one another because it was difficult to trust in each other. Each new hostage that came into camp took up space, food, and clothing. Fights broke out mainly during meal courses, with an insult from the cook, or a tray to receive food, or even for a set to sit and eat. There was not a lot of harmony in camp. If the men wanted to survive in camp they had to turn upon each other. Because with that one additional ration of food they received could determine whether they

Because of reactivity; people you're observing will act differently if they know the situation isn't natural, that the event isn't natural, or that they're being measured. Is this a problem in laboratory research? Don't participants know they're being observed and measured? Wouldn't this affect their behavior? Absolutely, positively, yes! But for whatever reason, reactivity is (for the most part) ignored in laboratory research.

Game theory cannot always predict reliable outcomes for real-life situations as it is more an

The “set in stone” guidelines should be followed to control the experiments and give the jury standards to judge on. Short and long term health issues are the biggest concerns. Some experiments could make a participant crazy or fearful if given the right circumstances. Along with experiments affecting mental heath, physical health could be affected as well. One could refuse to

Nash equilibrium can be described as the end of the game sequence. Player gains a posteriori experience during the sequences of the game which in turn help them to form the belief and gain knowledge that lead to the end point, the Nash equilibrium, hence there is no further knowledge that can be gained. In the usual finite set of games the marking of the end point, Nash equilibrium, will allow us to make better or optimal decision. If our decision making process doesn’t satisfy the Nash equilibrium, we must always be able to improve our decision and choice that we made till we hit that equilibrium.

We exist surrounded by others in nearly every aspect of our lives. It therefore seems reasonable that we act cooperatively, with a sense of care and concern for others. The prisoner’s dilemma game reveals precisely this necessity of acting with regard for others. In the prisoner’s dilemma, players must choose between confession and silence, not knowing how the other player will act. If both confess both receive ten years in prison, if one confesses the confessor is pardoned while the accomplice suffers twenty years in prison, and if both stay silent both receive a two-year sentence (Lecture 8.31.2016). Viewed in the context of international relations regarding, for example, an arms race, in which nations experience the same “black box situation,” facing a gap in knowledge, unable to definitively predict how another nation will act, if the world wishes to survive intact, it clearly behooves us to act in a manner of reciprocal altruism, choosing to cooperate with the expectation the other nation will do the same (Lecture 8.31.2016). No matter our desire for individual autonomy, the prisoner’s dilemma, a microcosm for our daily experiences, reveals that we exist in a complex “network of relationships” in which everyone’s decisions have profound, often unforeseen impacts on one another (Kekes 52). Our identities as both social and human beings necessitate this cooperation because only with it can we face “human vulnerability, scarce resources, the requirements and benefits of

Game Theory, the analysis of the concepts used in social reasoning when dealing with situations of conflict (Rubinstein, 1991), is one of many methods used to provide rational strategies towards the making of decisions. Game theory provides logical and mathematical models towards decision-making which are applied to real-life situations such as