View Poll Results: What is your proposal?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • $100 to me, $0 to player B

    4 7.02%
  • $99 to me, $1 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $90 to me, $10 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $80 to me, $20 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $70 to me, $30 to player B

    2 3.51%
  • $60 to me, $40 to player B

    7 12.28%
  • $50 to me, $50 to player B

    36 63.16%
  • $40 to me, $60 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $30 to me, $70 to player B

    0 0%
  • $20 or less to me, $80 or more to player B

    0 0%
Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 134

Thread: Hypothetical: $100 Game

  1. #121
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Dakota
    Last Seen
    09-02-17 @ 08:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    2,357

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Overall with significant dollar values people would accept offer's that were less "fair" as the economic loss would be overcome the sense of loss of fairness in the exchange. This is a failure of this "Game theory" and the way it has generally been presented
    Good point, $1 does not mean a lot to other people. I should have used bigger amounts.

  2. #122
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    you make me laugh. Not at you, but with you. That's fine. If that makes you happy, that's what you should do. But I don't think that's what makes most people happy - that's just my opinion. I think most people would still want to make another happy even if that person didn't extend a hand to them. (though from my view, they didn't take anything from them either)
    I would have no inclination to make an asshole happy. And someone who just gipped me out of money is an asshole. Now, if I was person A, I may well decide to give person B all of it out of a desire to 'make them happy', but that's assuming that the person hasn't done anything to make me think he's an asshole. I will give the benefit of the doubt. However, if the person has just proven to me that they don't give a rat's patootie about MY happiness (in getting some of the money) then I am certainly not going to give a rat's patootie about theirs. Rewarding jerks doesn't make me warm and fuzzy inside.

  3. #123
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    Good clarification on ideals vs recognition of human instinct. And to clarify - I strongly support fairness. If someone breaks the rules of society - if they cheat, lie, steal, etc. They should be punished! And please don't get me wrong, I'm a very giving person. But, as I explained yesterday in other messages, when I ask myself why, it's because of morals. Because I want to be moral and have a desire to fill these morals. I hope all people have that desire. But I believe the fulfill those morals because the reprucussions of not fulfilling those morals are you feeling like a bad person. And so I do it for me is my conclusion. If I were indifferent to morals, I wouldn't do anything good unless it happened to benefit me. But this is not the case. And so I assume that the reason I do it is for me. You believe we are moral because it is human nature to be moral. I disagree. I think it's human nature to know what morals are, but we choose to be moral for ourselves. Because it feels good or at least doesn't make us feel bad for not being moral.

    Anyway, bringing this back to the topic - I don't think it's immoral to expect someone to maximize their potential profits so long as they aren't immoral. That is to say, aren't stealing, cheating, lying, etc. If they follow those rules, I would allow it.
    Yes. I am sure you are a moral person. However, you are missing the point. I have pointed out an aspect of human nature and explained why it is important. If you really look around, you will see that its importance is self evident as it has a very real and strong power to shape our society. You may disagree whether this aspect of human nature is a good thing, but barring some genetic change, its not going to go away. Ultimately, people are not solely self-maximizers because if they were, we would not even have this conversation because it would be obvious to both of us. We do not discuss the proper number of arms and legs for example.

    You can and should state your case why you think one value system is better than another, but you are doing yourself a disservice in pretending that people are something that they are not. The majority would be uncomfortable in a strictly justice based system (with no mercy or empathy) and they have a legitimate reason for feeling that way due the fact it is in their very make-up.

  4. #124
    Educator
    Anarcho-fascist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    T E X A S !
    Last Seen
    09-26-14 @ 11:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,069
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    person : game theory problems :: frictionless surface : physics problems

  5. #125
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:11 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,936

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    When I asked my sister what she would do in this game, she told me she would only accept the 100/0 split if person A was her husband, because then she'd get it anyway. Despite the fact that it would be pointless to have the game played with two related people, I thought it was a funny answer.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  6. #126
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Yes. I am sure you are a moral person. However, you are missing the point. I have pointed out an aspect of human nature and explained why it is important. If you really look around, you will see that its importance is self evident as it has a very real and strong power to shape our society. You may disagree whether this aspect of human nature is a good thing, but barring some genetic change, its not going to go away. Ultimately, people are not solely self-maximizers because if they were, we would not even have this conversation because it would be obvious to both of us. We do not discuss the proper number of arms and legs for example.

    You can and should state your case why you think one value system is better than another, but you are doing yourself a disservice in pretending that people are something that they are not. The majority would be uncomfortable in a strictly justice based system (with no mercy or empathy) and they have a legitimate reason for feeling that way due the fact it is in their very make-up.
    I cannot 'state my case' any better than you can. We both see the same evidence. And we have used the evidence to support our claims. morals do have a very real and strong power to shape our society. I am not arguing that. It is in human nature to understand morals and want to be a moral person. I understand that. They question I answer differently is WHY? I believe it reduces to self maximization. You believe it is what it is and is no more complicated than that. Regardless, the end result is nearly the same - people will be moral - will do good deeds - will help their neighbor.

    In fact, I think the fact that they help others to help themselves is a huge factor as to how good a person is - moreso than if it was just their nature - because they are CHOOSING to do so. If helping someone else makes you feel that good about yourself (or if not helping them would make you feel that bad about yourself) that you help them with no other reward than the good feeling or lack of bad feeling, then I'd say you have a huge concern with supporting your moral integrity and you are an awesome person. If it's simply what you do because it's in your nature, you're good person sure, but you had no choice but to be a good person. My conclusion would say that you have a strong conscience and I'd like you. So no - I'm not doing myself a disservice. And I'm not 'pretending'. I'm sharing my belief. You're allowed to disagree and I welcome that. But please don't accuse me of pretending. That's just insulting.

    The last point I would like to make is a point that I have made before: This game is for $100. The two key parts to that point is 1) it is a game in which I am just trying to max out with no cost to myself. 2) It is $100. It is not a life changing amount. If it were $10myn, then I would absolutely split the money in some way. probably a 50/50. Though again, I think I could get away with more, but I would want to do that person a favor. Because my life would change w/ $5myn and I would be very happy to be able to help someone else change their life with $5myn at no cost to me. But $50 certainly won't change their life. If it were a different game, I would have a different answer. My answer is based on $100 and it's hard to believe people would be so emotional over $100. And my life wouldn't change knowing I could have had $50 but blew it going for $100. If person B rejected my 100/0 offer, I would be confused because it simply doesn't seem like that big of a deal to me. I would think that they wouldn't expect anything other than a 100/0. Again, this is my opinion based on my belief system - not pretending and I think it is more pure for the reasons I stated above. I like that we can disagree and I hope we can get back to that being ok with you.

  7. #127
    User
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    08-04-11 @ 06:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    1

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Taken as a hypothetical, 50/50 is the only rational answer. Especially since the "value" of anything less than 50 is distorted by the inflationary aspects of the 'other' receiving anything more that 50. This inflationary/deflationary effect is magnified the closer we get to 100/0 of course. It wouldn't be a linear progression. Especially since the point of this exercise is to make poor desperate people feel good (feel 'rational') about getting screwed by the wealthy. If the 'poor' realize they will retain their position (starting and ending with zero), while the 'wealthy' have everything to lose (starting with 100 and maybe ending with 0), the 'poor' become the party who are negotiating from strength. Person B can bring the whole system down and be no worse off. Person A can chose between losing everything and losing half. Under this model, it would be just as solid to argue that person B should not accept unless offered 99 - as it would to say they should accept 1. The ONLY economically rational offer is 50/50.
    Last edited by PeterAthans; 08-04-11 at 06:15 PM. Reason: wrong choice of words: changed mathematically to economically

  8. #128
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,453
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptainCourtesy View Post
    If we are dealing in pure economics, then $99 to me and $1 to player B is the correct answer: both people turn out ahead and I, having the control would want to maximize my take. However, if we bring human psychology into it, it would depend on the personalities of the players. Probably a $50/$50 split would work most often.
    I just read about this recently, but can't remember what the outcome was. I know where I read it, but ill see how it goes here before I check.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  9. #129
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    12,453
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Wiseone View Post
    I think the poll, although its just 11 people, but I could say 78% to sound more convincing, shows a trend towards a social norm of fairness. That is, its not right to take advantage of someone in a poor or powerless situation, such as under pure logic being forced to accept a single dollar while you take 99.

    The 50/50 splits is equal and leaves the deciding party without a sense of guilt or shame in having taken advantage of a situation where they were placed as the decider purely by chance, and I believe there's an underlying agreement that people expect from one another for fairness. Also consider that not feeling the sense of guilt may be more valuable to the decider than an extra 49 bucks. Thats the problem I see with a lot of economic theory, it ignores things it can't quantify, like "feelings," or even worse actually tries to quantify them.
    I've read about this experiment and culture is a major factor. People from a culture with strong rules about gifts actually reject an even split in favor of one where they get LESS than half, iirc.
    Anyone wondering what I'm talking about start here:
    The Psychology of Persuasion

  10. #130
    Professor
    atrasicarius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Last Seen
    12-23-12 @ 05:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    2,227

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Anarcho-fascist View Post
    person : game theory problems :: frictionless surface : physics problems
    Imagine a spherical cow in a vacuum...
    For: legalizing drugs, gay marriage, abortion, guns, universal health care, public sector jobs, nuclear power, free education, progressive taxation
    Against: corporations, make-work, the 40 hour work week, intellectual property, imperialism, "homeland security," censorship

Page 13 of 14 FirstFirst ... 311121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •