Since time immemorial, philosophers and other theorists have strived to come up with explanations for various phenomena in the society according to their understanding. Philosophers such as Aristotle and Socrates were among the first to define terms such as social contract theory in their quest to provide a better understanding of it. Social contract derives its origins from the same time as philosophy itself. It means that someone’s political and moral obligations depend on a contract or agreement that they have put among them. In most occasions, it applies to the society in which they live in. An in-depth analysis of the social contract theory and prisoners’ dilemma is provided in this paper.
The theory that was proposed by John Rawl provided a new momentum for political and moral philosophy. David Gauthier was also among the scholars who contributed their perspectives on the matter. However, various scholars have come out with their definitions and even offered criticism of social contract theory. Philosophers who are conscious about racial affiliations together with feminists have come to the understanding that social contract they provide the least picture of people’s political and moral lives.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The Philosophy of social science plays a crucial role in the society. However, there are two central roles that it plays in the community. The primary purpose that it represents is that it produces a reconstruction of social science that is rational. Additionally, the philosophy of social science plays another role in the lives of human beings. It critiques the social sciences while challenging their ability to explain the social sciences and improve people’s understanding of social sciences. Therefore, the philosophy of social science is both perspective and descriptive (Brice-Montas, 2016).
A social contract is an agreement that occurs between two or more people in which there is a mutual benefit between them. Prisoners’ dilemma provides the best means that can be used to analyze the factors such as social contract, egoism, and utilitarianism. The Prisoner’s Dilemma was a theory that was created by David Gauthier. It shows the manner in which people look out for their interests instead of working together as a team.
The dilemma of the Prisoners started when they arrested for crimes that they have committed together. The theory suggests that the police have substantial evidence to convict the both of them for a smaller crime. However, the law enforcement officers need a stronger indication from either of them that can be sued to convince them of more serious crime. The police decide a good strategy that they can use to ensure that the prisoners provide them with the information that they need. They put the two of them in different rooms so which makes it impossible for them to communicate with each other. Each one of the is convinced to confess that their partner has committed a more serious crime so that they can be given lighter sentences. However, if they refuse to cooperate and their partner does, they might be incarcerated for a period of up to ten years.
The Dilemma
The dilemma that was faced by the two prisoners eventually did not result in the outcome that was desired. The main reason for this finding was because each one of them was working for her interest (University, 2015). Their minds were wired in such a way that each one of them wanted to protect herself at the expense of the other participant. Therefore, both of them find themselves in more serious trouble as compared to when they might have cooperated with each other in the process of making their decision.
Evaluation of the Dilemma
The dilemma shows that at the height of a crisis, people will always act in a manner that will favor them personally at the expense of others. Personal interests often seem more desirable than only other option. However, it usually leads to a worse result as compared to when the confronted parties had worked together as a team. A genuine dilemma that is faced by a prisoner is played only once. Otherwise, it is categorized as an iterated prisoner’s dilemma.
Theories of egoism, social contract and utilitarianism can be sued in analyzing the dilemma that was faced by the prisoners. An analysis of these arguments is given to show the one that is better in looking at the difficulty that was confronted by the prisoners. They can be used in looking at the ones that are consistent with the other prisoner in the manner of denying self-interest as the best option. An analysis is given of the theories and the method in which they apply to the situation that was faced by the two prisoners.
Utilitarianism Theory
This is a theory that emphasizes the outcome of what is wrong and what is right purely on the consequences. Utilitarianism theory advises people to make the decisions that will bring them the best results and improve their lives. Indeed, it emphasizes the choices that people make that will ultimately bring them happiness and contentment as opposed to unhappiness and gloom. Therefore, a person has to look at the results that his/her actions produce if they want to determine whether they are wrong or right. The idea behind this theory is to provide the best god for as many people as possible.
Egoism Theory
This theory advocates that people should undertake actions that will benefit them in the long-term and others. It has two categories, normative and descriptive. The supported for one main idea. It states that an individual’s interest is above that of anyone else and should be catered for first. Egoism theory says that people should always act in a manner that is beneficial to them.
Social Contract Theory
It is a theory that stipulates that people should be guided by a set of rules that will eventually lead to mutual benefit between them. The theory states that at times, people should give up their freedom for the overall benefit of the society. It means that social contract plays a significant role in the existence of the nation. Without the presence of a social deal, there would not be any order in the society, and in its place, there would be total anarchy (Brice-Montas, 2016).
From my own experience, I can conclude that it is always prudent to cooperate as opposed to being rebellious. The reason for this is because you cannot control what others might do to you. From my own experience, I remember when we were reported to our school administrator because of sneaking out of school. Upon questioning, I decided not to cooperate and protect my friend. On the other hand, my partner in crime accused me of everything. Therefore, I ended up being punished for the mistake that we both committed.
References
Brice-Montas, J. M. (2016). The Prisoner’s Dilemma. Argosy University , 45-56.
University, A. (2015). Utilitarian Ethics. Argosy University , 34-45.
