Posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2013, at 19:33:56
In reply to Re: the commons, posted by alexandra_k on September 25, 2013, at 19:22:07
The version of the tragedy of commons that I like (for my purposes) is the one where the selfish strategy is ultimately self-defeating in that it results in everyone (including the selfish individual) being worse off.
The version of psychopathy I like is the one where psychopaths turn out to have problems making long term plans (so some aspect of their rationality is in fact in question).
Emotions: might be mechanisms for solving the commitment problem.
the commitment problem:
I kidnap you. I let you see my face. I have a change in heart and don't want to kill you anymore. You say 'if you let me go I won't tell the police on you - I promise'. Why should I believe you? It is in your best interests to have me believe you now and then tell the police on me later? I conclude that I must kill you.
One solution to the commitment problem is for you to give me something as collatoral for later. Something I could use to blackmail you later, basically. Then you later have some incentive to keep your promise.
Or: You have a two hundred dollar briefcase... I could steal it. You could prosecute me but it would cost you three hundred dollars in court costs. I conclude that you are rational: You won't prosecute me. But instead I know you will become so f*ck*ng mad at my stealing your property that you will prosecute me even at considerable cost to yourself. This acts as a sufficient deterrant to me.
Like... The dishwashing liquid. It isnt' about the cost, obviously. Each and every one of us can afford to buy dishwashing liquid. It isn't about that.
Someone needs to take the time to herd the f*ck*ng people. Time... Time... Tick f*ck*ng tick.
I just want a quiet place where I can work on my thesis.
No... You selfish bitch.
pay attention to us.
Why can't people just organize themselves? Instead of buying masses of sh*t that nobody wants to eat and putting it in the fridge where nobody will eat it so it rots... Why can't they just buy whatever it is that they want to eat and eat that?
Then they might notice that they can share the costs with someone else... And since they know in fact how long whatever it is lasts them they have some indicator of whether they are contributing honestly or not.
Collaborating (to mutual benefit) is HARDER than going it alone, I reckon. Because of having to police teh cheaters.
Some cultures... Michelangelo was painting the cistene chapel... While certain other people were singing together in grass skirts.
I wonder why?
I wonder what mechanisms there are?
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1047868
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20130914/msgs/1051309.html