ACCESS // OPEN

01MIND ARCHIVE // OPEN ACCESS

SPIN.OPEN.DOUBT.

One spin opens a file from psychology, philosophy, logic, or society. Read it with suspicion.

01204 case files02ES + EN034 fronts
02

IDEA ROTOR

CURATED RANDOM
FILE SELECTED: Prisoner’s Dilemma, 4 min.
FRONTS / 04

Fronts

LOCAL
ARCHIVE

00 / 204

Local archive

This browser remembers what you opened and saved.

0 / 204 opened
Nothing leaves this browser.

FILE SELECTED // FILE 00

Society & behavior4 MINExtended dossierContext-dependent

Prisoner’s Dilemma

Two people gain by cooperating, but each gets an immediate advantage by defecting. What would you choose without talking?

01 / SUMMARY

In short

It is an incentive structure in which individually dominant choices can produce a worse outcome for both parties. Repetition, reputation, communication, and institutions can change the prospects for cooperation.

02 / SEQUENCE

What happens

  1. 01

    Each player compares cooperation and defection without controlling the other choice.

  2. 02

    Defection protects against exploitation and offers an immediate individual gain.

  3. 03

    If both follow that incentive, they end up worse than under mutual cooperation.

03 / SCENE

In the wild

Two firms could cut pollution and benefit society; if each fears bearing the cost alone, both may defect and worsen the environment.

04 / LIMIT

The limit

It does not prove that humans are inevitably selfish or that cooperation is always irrational.

FINAL NOTE

What remains

Changing the game often beats demanding heroism: create reputation, repetition, communication, or verifiable guarantees.

CHECK / 01

Put it to work

01

How firm is your read?

Which change supports stable cooperation?