Prisoner'S Dilemma

The prisoner’s dilemma is a classic example of why two people might refuse to cooperate, even if it appears to be in their best interests. In the dilemma, two prisoners are each offered the same deal: if they both confess to the crime, they will each serve two years in prison. If one confesses and the other does not, the confessor will be set free while the other will serve three years. If neither confesses, they will each serve one year. The dilemma arises because each prisoner has to decide whether to confess or not, without knowing what the other will do. If both prisoners refuse to confess, they will each serve one year in prison. However, if one prisoner confesses and the other does not, the confessor will be set free while the other will serve three years.

The dilemma can be resolved if both prisoners cooperate and do not confess. However, if both prisoners are self-interested and only care about their own interests, they are likely to confess and both end up serving two years in prison. The prisoner’s dilemma is a paradox in decision analysis in which two individuals acting in their own self-interests do not produce the optimal outcome. It is a prime example of game theory and how strategic thinking between individuals can lead to suboptimal outcomes for both players.