Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Universal defection among rational self-interested agents produces a state analogous to Hobbes' war of all against all.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Hobbes' war of all against all is defined by mortal insecurity and absence of property, not merely suboptimal equilibrium outcomes.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Universal defection in iterated PD games still presupposes stable rules, payoff structures, and identifiable agents—conditions Hobbes denies in the state of nature.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Equating Nash equilibria with Hobbesian anarchy conflates game-theoretic mutual disadvantage with the pre-political absence of enforceable norms entirely.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Gauthier and Binmore both argue that rational agents behind uncertainty about their strategic position would contract toward cooperation, not lock into defection.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
If rationality itself generates cooperative solutions under idealized bargaining conditions, universal defection reflects a failure of modeling assumptions, not rationality as such.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
A population imitating the most successful strategy converges on 'All Defect'.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
'All Defect' as a universal equilibrium mirrors Hobbes' description of the state of nature as a war of all against all.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.