WrestlingSmarks Ethics, Morals, and Philosophy Debate Club

[Bobby Barrows]

I have a different thought experiment to bring up but I'm not gonna share it here, it belongs in the creepy Wikipedia thread.

 

[Bobby Barrows]

The Prisoner's Dilemma

You and your criminal accomplice are arrested and detained. Each prisoner is placed in solitary confinement with no means of relaying information between one another. The police admit they don't have enough to convict either of you with the greater charge. Instead, they plan to sentence both of you to a lesser charge with lower prison time.

However, you are informed that you can make a deal to avoid any jail time, if you opt to testify against your friend, he will get the maximum sentence, whilst you will walk free. A very good deal, no? The police then reveal that the same offer has been made to your accomplice. The conditions are set as follows:

1. If you and your accomplice remain silent and protect each other, you both will receive minimum time.

2. If you rat on your partner and he remains silent, your partner will face the maximum sentence, and you will go free.

3. If you remain silent, but your partner rats you out, you will face the maximum sentence, and your partner will be free.

4. If both of you rat each other out, you and your accomplice will both receive a moderate sentence.

To help visualize the problem, allow me to design a table for everyone:

Prisoner A \ Prisoner B	Prisoner B Stays Silent	Prisoner B Testifies
Prisoner A Stays Silent	Each serves 5 years	Prisoner A: 20 Years Prisoner B: Goes Free
Prisoner A Testifies	Prisoner A: Goes Free Prisoner B: 20 Years	Each serves 10 years

The simple question is what would you, Prisoner A, choose to do, fulling knowing that you are entirely unaware of what your partner will chooser to do.