The Search for a Fair Society: Neoliberalism as an Expression of the Prisoner’s Dilemma
September 21. A good day to you. Grab a coffee and let’s talk about a realistic utopia of a fair society.
I didn’t mean to dedicate a second day to critiquing the importance neoliberalists put on personal liberties to the point where any other liberties play, at best, a supporting role to personal freedom and economic prosperity. I did prove sufficiently yesterday that this is neither the basis for a fair society nor will it ever lead to prosperity for all. But after putting my argument onto paper and talking about it excessively I realized how everything I had just written and said fits the Prisoner’s Dilemma perfectly.
In simple terms, the Prisoner’s Dilemma describes a situation where two criminals, in separate interrogation rooms and therefore unable to communicate, must each choose between staying loyal to their partner by refusing to talk or trying to rescue themselves by throwing the partner under the bus. For this thought experiment it is assumed that all the police has are suspicions but no incriminating evidence against either and they will never get the evidence either. So, when both say nothing, both walk free and share the spoils. Each one gets a half. If one of them would incriminate the other, the other would go to prison, but the person talking would walk free with no need to share the spoils. The talking person would get all. But only if the other person would stay loyal to the original partnership and would continue to stay mum. If the second person talks as well, both lose their freedom and all the spoils.
Now substitute the two criminals with a group of people coming together to work out an agreement about a dataset that all members of the group agree to use henceforth in their individual world generation processes in their minds. This dataset will enable them to cooperate and thereby offset the high risk that random searches represent for the individual. The motivation of all members to become part of this social contract is the same: they want to engage in random searches aka lean into the unknown in order to collect the high payoff such searches promise. It is understood by all – and this data therefore becomes part of the dataset all parties to the contract agree to use in their world generation processes – that offsetting the risk means that whatever is gained by any party of the contract while being bound by the contract and thus enabled to conduct random searches (exploring rather than exploiting existing knowledge) is shared to the degree that is necessary to enable all to continuously engage in random searches.
The first randomized searches based on the security the contract offers are conducted by all members and one member gets lucky. Before, they’d all gone to spots where they’d found potatoes before to secure their dinner (exploiting of existing knowledge). Now, this one member happened upon bananas and found them tasty and filling. He could share not just part of the hoard but the knowledge. And if they’d generated the model of the world in their mind with the dataset the members to the contract had all agreed to, it wouldn’t even be a question. Everyone then could fall back on potatoes and bananas but also go out even more safely now to conduct random searches to add to this knowledge with nuts or apples or pumpkin spice latte or whatever they happen upon themselves.
But the banana king had always ever only thought of the advantage that cooperating with the others would give him. After all, he, too, had never been able to engage in random searches alone, no matter how high the payoff they ultimately promised and how much he wanted that. And he had in order for him to experience exactly this moment of success. It only dawn on him now that the contract he had entered had put responsibilities on him. But as he saw it, he had a choice. He could share the knowledge about the bananas as the agreement demanded or keep it all to himself. In his mind, the latter would give him all the advantages of both worlds – individual exploitation and collective exploration – without the risk or the responsibilities.
But like in the Prisoner’s Dilemma, each member of the group being successful would have the same choice. Banana King would only ever hit the desired jackpot, when everyone else in the group stayed loyal to the agreement. Why? Because all members fulfilling their responsibilities to the group is what allows for the advantage to materialize. Without sharing the success to the agreed upon degree, the risk that random searches represent for the individual isn’t offset. Hence, all the members but the one successful would need to go back to exploiting existing knowledge. But now, with the cooperation agreement in place, they would have to share the meager payoff with everyone else including Banana King. They would work so he and only he could still do what they all had entered the agreement for. Like in the Prisoner’s Dilemma none of the members would stay voluntarily in this agreement under these conditions. They would rather leave and go on back to their separate models of the world, unless they are forced to continue to use the now burdening dataset for the benefit of Banana King.
When it comes to society, this will always be the outcome of Neoliberalism. The onus placed on personal freedom will always lead to the introduction of violence and the threat thereof into the system and a whole group burdened for the gain of a few who have all the power.
The reason why Banana King would miss the obvious outcome of his behavior or people like Locke: the momentary success grants us a sense of power which messes with our mirroring. Basically, we stop using data that we attribute to another in the creation of our self. It leads to the belief that others are stupid and lazy that’s why they need rule but our superior self does not. But since we know that, it is preventable. What brings us back to the point that society is a constant conversation between all the members to remain on the same page and maintain and adjust the common dataset.
Any thoughts? Tell me.
To watch this post as a video, go here.
#science #history #reality #society #philosophy #WorldGeneration #fairness #information #Rawls #OriginalPosition #BasicLiberties #Locke #PrisonersDilemma #mind #self #brain #thinking #exploring
