• Hypothetical Dilemma
    56 replies, posted
For now, imagine that you and an acquaintance of yours were arrested and found to be in possession of illegal drugs and will be convicted accordingly. The prosecutors detain each of you in separate rooms in which neither of you can hear the other's conversation. The prosecutors inform you that the sentence for drug possession is 2 years in prison. However, the prosecution is looking to solidify a prominent anti-drug image and wants the most severe punishment possible. Thus, the prosecution gives you the option to testify against your partner. If you do this, you will go free and your partner will get 10 years in jail. Bear in mind that you can only assume that your partner is being given the same options that you are. Alternatively, if both of you testify against one another, you each get a prison sentence of 5 years. You can assume no more than what is given in the above prompt. What do you do?
Oh you don't know what your partner is going to do. You should've said that you and your partner can't break into agreement. It is a dilemma.
I was going to complain about yet another philosophical dilemma thread, but this one is actually very well made. [QUOTE=mrkaki;25128238]How is it a dilemma? Testify against one another and get a prison sentence of 5 years, that's the most logical option.[/QUOTE] You don't know about it until you are detained, and if the other person resuses to testify he gets ten years.
If the acquaintance is a jerk, I'll testify against him.
If you both say nothing, you will get less time in prison? If it's just an acquaintance, I would testify against. If they are a close friend, I'd say nothing.
I'd still testify against him, but it'd depend on the person I'm testifying against. Remember we brought this onto each other. You can only hope for the best when you testify against him.
[QUOTE=Whomobile;25128257]If the acquaintance is a jerk, I'll testify against him.[/QUOTE] This, but if not, use your handcuffs to strangle the guard on your left, then demand that the other guard unlock the cuffs. Then you're on your own from there :v:
Detonate the bomb you have secretly implanted in your acquaintance, and testify against him. :D
Oh, I just reread the question, if the acquaintance and you both were in possession of illicit drugs, then I wouldn't testify. If two people get court with with a crime, their equally guilty. I still would testify if he/she was a jerk though.
I don't see why I can't testify against myself too. Admitting both of us to be guilty would still give us the same 5 year sentence. That's a lot more logical than the rest of the options, and should still be possible.
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;25128239]I was going to complain about yet another philosophical dilemma thread, but [b]this one is actually very well made.[/b][/QUOTE] I hope you're kidding :frog: I see nothing original about a restatement of the prisoner's dilemma that is probably overused everywhere there exists a discussion for it.
[QUOTE=Phoenix Ashes;25128331]I hope you're kidding :frog: I see nothing original about a restatement of the prisoner's dilemma that is probably overused everywhere there exists a discussion for it.[/QUOTE] It may be a rehash of the prisoner's dilemma but it's better than the shit that's usually posted here. [B]"Lol A Railway CART is about to hit 5 PEOPLE !!!! BUt if u switch track only 1 die what si better????"[/B]
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;25128361]It may be a rehash of the prisoner's dilemma but it's better than the shit that's usually posted here. [B]"Lol A Railway CART is about to hit 5 PEOPLE !!!! BUt if u switch track only 1 die what si better????"[/B][/QUOTE] how is it better aside you from being capable of stating the other in retarded leet speak?
[QUOTE=Phoenix Ashes;25128369]how is it better aside you from being capable of stating the other in retarded leet speak?[/QUOTE] Hyperbole. And because this has more depth to it, the other example is crude and is basically "Oh no people are gonna die oh no what do" as opposed to a question that makes you question your own ethics, and whether selling out a friend to potentially save yourself from prison time is better than appealing to your own morals and refusing to talk. Kind of one of the major pillars of philosophy, questioning yourself. Like I said, the other is crap not only because of that but because it isn't specified whether the one person is a close relative, so the answer is clear cut. Jeeze.
If we look at this mathematically (well basic maths), we could assign ranks in order of the best possible outcome, where a higher value of rank, indicates a better outcome. 4: You go free 3: You get 2 years 2: You get 5 years 1: You get 10 years Now the possible results of each one - Testify: 4 + 2 = 6 - Silence: 3 + 1 = 4 This basically means that, if you testify, you are more likely to get a better outcome.
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;25128394]Hyperbole. And because this has more depth to it, the other example is crude and is basically "Oh no people are gonna die oh no what do" as opposed to a question that makes you question your own ethics, and whether selling out a friend to potentially save yourself from prison time is better than appealing to your own morals and refusing to talk. Like I said, the other is crap not only because of that but because it isn't specified whether the one person is a close relative, so the answer is clear cut. Jeeze.[/QUOTE] In no where does the OP state that he has specified that the person in question is a friend. He used the words "acquaintance", "partner", etc. That's as neutral as you can go. Those descriptors mean different things depending on the person. He also said to assume noting that isn't stated. I see how this example is no better than having unspecified participants.
I would keep my silence. Worst case scenario, I get 10 years - but I get to spend them with a clear conscience whilst the other person (hopefully) feels bad about it.
Testify at worst gets you 5 years, at best freedom, whereas silence is either jail, or more jail. Pretty easy choice.
If you're under oath, you have to testify against him, otherwise if they find out you're lying, you're going to jail, as well.
I wouldn't hang out with some moronic coward who would doom someone to 5-10 years in prison when we could get only two years. Of course, I wouldn't get caught in the first place.
[QUOTE=Bllasae;25128576]If you're under oath, you have to testify against him, otherwise if they find out you're lying, you're going to jail, as well.[/QUOTE] Because swearing on the bible is totally legit.
[QUOTE=Bllasae;25128576]If you're under oath, you have to testify against him, otherwise if they find out you're lying, you're going to jail, as well.[/QUOTE] [quote]You can assume no more than what is given in the above prompt. What do you do?[/quote] Ah, basic instructions - Escaping the grasp of posters since 2010.
i would pull out an uzi and save the day
Just be a bro.
here is a dilemma of my own: the local town only has two fast food restaurants, taco bell and kfc. you are out late with your friends and haven't had dinner. where do you get your dinner?
[QUOTE=abcpea;25128647]here is a dilemma of my own: the local town only has two fast food restaurants, taco bell and kfc. you are out late with your friends and haven't had dinner. where do you get your dinner?[/QUOTE] both
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;25128613]Ah, basic instructions - Escaping the grasp of posters since 2010.[/QUOTE] please address your last post in the thread CheeseMan, thank you.
[QUOTE=Phoenix Ashes;25128663]please address your last post in the thread CheeseMan, thank you.[/QUOTE] Please address my last post [I]in the what the fuck does that even mean what are you saying to me[/I] In your attempt to sound professional you've made the shit you say unreadable.
[QUOTE=CheeseMan;25128682]Please address my last post [I]in the what the fuck does that even mean what are you saying to me[/I] In your attempt to sound professional you've made the shit you say unreadable.[/QUOTE] Phoenix: brb making thread. cheese-man: D: [editline]01:17PM[/editline] back on topic: keep your silences are winning! :giggity:
I think I'd keep my silence, unless my friend was an asshole, because I would have brought the whole problem onto myself as well.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.