Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Both players are economically rational, meaning each will... — Carmelics
    Home/Consequentialism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→Mutual confession is the solution to the Prisoner's Dilemma game, the outcome on which play must converge when players are economically rational.

    Both players are economically rational, meaning each will always choose strategies that yield higher payoffs over strategies that yield lower payoffs.

    ConsequentialismSocial Contract
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    ConsequentialismSocial Contract

    Related

    After eliminating Player I's bottom row, Player II's payoff from confessing is h...Because refusing to confess is strictly dominated for Player I, Player I will ne...Because refusing to confess is strictly dominated for Player II given the reduce...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Consequentialism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Mutual confession is the solution to the Prisoner's Dilemma game, the outcome on...
    +1 moreShow less
    Player I's payoffs in every cell of the top row (confess) are higher than the co...

    Similar

    A rational player would never play a dominated action, since action b ...83%A player who knowingly chooses a strictly dominated strategy violates ...80%Avoidance of strictly dominated strategies is a minimum requirement of...79%At each deletion step, the only premise required is that both players ...79%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: game-theory
    View source passageHide passage
    The players, and analysts, can predict this outcome using a mechanical procedure, known as iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies. Player 1 can see by examining the matrix that his payoffs in each cell of the top row are higher than his payoffs in each corresponding cell of the bottom row. Therefore, it can never be utility-maximizing for him to play his bottom-row strategy, viz., refusing to confess, regardless of what Player II does. Since Player I’s bottom-row strategy will nev

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective