The dilemma game is a way to understand the structure of the human psyche. What to choose: selfishness or common benefit? Is it worth trusting or is it more profitable to betray?
Prisoner's Dilemma is an original game. The legend is as follows: two bandits-accomplices were detained and placed in different places. They were not allowed to communicate with each other. The prosecution knows that they committed a number of crimes, but there is evidence for only one episode. Each prisoner is told that if he turns in his partner, he will receive a substantial leniency.
The conditions are as follows:
- if he betrays his partner alone, he gets 3 months in prison, and his accomplice gets 10 years;
- if both betray each other, they get 5 years in prison;
- if both refuse to "knock" on accomplices, then each is serving a sentence for a year.
A dilemma is the complexity of the choice that confronts people who find themselves in such a situation. For each person individually, it is more profitable to slander an accomplice, because. if the partner is silent, then the traitor will get off with only 3 months in prison. If the accomplice also says his word, bothget half the time. It's still better than to remain silent, find out about the betrayal and get 10 years.
On the other hand, trust and mutual "protection" are better for the common benefit. Because in the event that one betrays the other, the total period for two is 10 years and 3 months. If both "knock", then 10 years. And if the partners do not hand over each other, together they will serve only two years. This is the dilemma they face. This means that a person needs to make a conscious and thoughtful decision.
If accomplices are confident in each other, it makes sense to remain silent. But it's pretty risky. After all, there is an opportunity to pay for your trust and get 10 years in prison.
It is especially interesting to play such a game in several stages. Moreover, it is important that the players do not know their number. Otherwise, at the penultimate stage, they will a priori choose betrayal. After all, nothing further depends on this.
The dilemma game is a very exciting sight. Moreover, in an artificially created situation, the solution looks more or less obvious. But in real life, not everyone would do the same. Therefore, conditions are often deliberately created in the game under which mutual assistance as a concept ceases to exist. And cooperation becomes only a temporary profitable solution. But this behavior carries the biggest risk.
In a repetitive game, the prisoner's dilemma is that it's more profitable not to betray a partner. Therefore, gradually both players come to this. Several game strategies are possible:
- striving for cooperation (regardless of the actions of the opponent);
- unwillingness to cooperate under any circumstances;
- until the moment of betrayal, cooperate, after that - always substitute (this strategy is the most popular, although it is unprofitable for the system as a whole);
- mirror the opponent's previous moves.
As you can see, there are many options for the development of events. And even in cases where the rivals were allowed to communicate and they agreed on joint actions, the outcome was not always predictable.
