The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
18-12-2014, 07:11 AM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(17-12-2014 03:37 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  2. As we Christians believe and know, without that Don's add-on, atheists and theists face some consequences in this life for their actions. Disregarding the next world, I'm certain you'd agree. It remains obvious to us, therefore, that since atheists can see they have consequences for actions in this world (sometimes or "often enough" if you prefer) they have no excuse for the next world. You can tell God you appreciate Heaven or resent Hell or both when you see him, but you cannot see "Gee, I face consequences for what I do and don't do...? Really?"

Tomasia raised the same point earlier. The difference is God will supposedly always catch someone and hold them accountable, whereas human-based consequences don't always work as expected. There are totally people who weigh risks and rewards when figuring whether to commit a crime. Despite that, a lot of people still opt to not commit crimes, even if they think they can get away with it.

Contrasted with a system where you will always get caught, you're always facing a risk or a reward. If I'm getting paid to do good deed X, then I wouldn't consider it truly selfless to do X (unless the payment is sufficiently small). The only way it could be selfless was if I were unaware of the reward.


(17-12-2014 03:37 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  3. Yes, Christians live in this world daily: Every person knows they will be punished for resisting God, blessed for receiving Him and selfish and altruistic desires affect the "gamer's" choices. The benefit for the individual is that no other being's choices, defect or cooperation can alter their destiny, not even God's, if one believes in free will. You have what atheists perceive as a curse or burden, the Don's rules, but you also can choose to go with the Don or not.

Well, yes. The crux of game theory is choices.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2014, 07:40 AM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(17-12-2014 01:58 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  There are definitely some strong similarities, but consider the difference between a police force that sometimes catches you to one that always catches you. If you know you will always be caught, and you're explicitly told about a punishment and reward system that will always be applied, it doesn't leave as much room for selfless actions. The only way one could behave selflessly in a system like this would be to forget about it for the time being.

The only way you would act selflessly, is if your actions are not brought on by fear, but by love for others. There's a difference between not cheating on your wife for fear of being caught, and not cheating on your wife because you love her, and desire to be with her only, to be truthful and faithful to her, and these things are done joyfully, as all our acts of authentic compassion are. The truth is my wife would likely leave me if I cheated on her, and our marriage will likely last longer if I didn't, but these are not the basis for why I don't cheat on her.

Quote:Well, I think both matter, at least for establishing context. It's just, if I'm being paid to do "good", then I don't think I could consider those good actions taken to be fully selfless.

It's not the fact that there's a reward, but if the reward (or punishment) is the reason why one acts.

Imagine a father who takes care of his kids, but the only reason he does so is because he wants to insure that when he is older and unable to take care of himself, they will take care of him.

Many fathers may be aware that taking care of your children helps to ensure they'll take care of you when you are no longer able to, but their devotions to their children, their care for their children is not for the sake of this reward. But rather acting with such compassion is a fulfillment in itself, a reward itself, not done with grudegery, but with joy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-12-2014, 09:46 AM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(18-12-2014 07:11 AM)RobbyPants Wrote:  
(17-12-2014 03:37 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  2. As we Christians believe and know, without that Don's add-on, atheists and theists face some consequences in this life for their actions. Disregarding the next world, I'm certain you'd agree. It remains obvious to us, therefore, that since atheists can see they have consequences for actions in this world (sometimes or "often enough" if you prefer) they have no excuse for the next world. You can tell God you appreciate Heaven or resent Hell or both when you see him, but you cannot see "Gee, I face consequences for what I do and don't do...? Really?"

Tomasia raised the same point earlier. The difference is God will supposedly always catch someone and hold them accountable, whereas human-based consequences don't always work as expected. There are totally people who weigh risks and rewards when figuring whether to commit a crime. Despite that, a lot of people still opt to not commit crimes, even if they think they can get away with it.

Contrasted with a system where you will always get caught, you're always facing a risk or a reward. If I'm getting paid to do good deed X, then I wouldn't consider it truly selfless to do X (unless the payment is sufficiently small). The only way it could be selfless was if I were unaware of the reward.

The other key difference is that the Don clearly exists, whereas God, if he exists, is playing hide-and-seek with us. We can model the uncertainty of whether God exists to punish or reward us using (Bayesian) probability. It turns out that the mathematical impact in this game surrounding the uncertainty of God existing to punish us, and the uncertainty of the Don finding out in order to punish us, is identical.

... except there are probably a bunch of unambiguous examples of people the Don punished sitting in the morgue with slit throats or somesuch, and not so much any unambiguous examples of God punishing people. The probability we would ascribe to the Don punishing us would be statistically distinguishable from 0. The probability of God punishing us would not be.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2014, 01:53 PM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
If we added to the dilemma the possibility to escape punishment for a time and go on our own--until a worse punishment was meted out in the end--we'd need to factor in our "hit me later, not now!" weak natures. That's the real dilemma as presented in the scriptures.

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2014, 03:20 PM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(18-12-2014 07:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  The only way you would act selflessly, is if your actions are not brought on by fear, but by love for others. There's a difference between not cheating on your wife for fear of being caught, and not cheating on your wife because you love her, and desire to be with her only, to be truthful and faithful to her, and these things are done joyfully, as all our acts of authentic compassion are. The truth is my wife would likely leave me if I cheated on her, and our marriage will likely last longer if I didn't, but these are not the basis for why I don't cheat on her.

Agreed. So, if you know you will always be caught cheating on your wife, then it's hard to say that deciding not to cheat wouldn't be a selfless act. Maybe you don't want to for other reasons, but knowing there's a 100% chance of getting caught is going to factor into the decision.


(18-12-2014 07:40 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  It's not the fact that there's a reward, but if the reward (or punishment) is the reason why one acts.

I know. I said that in my initial post to you:

(17-12-2014 01:58 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  There are definitely some strong similarities, but consider the difference between a police force that sometimes catches you to one that always catches you. If you know you will always be caught, and you're explicitly told about a punishment and reward system that will always be applied, it doesn't leave as much room for selfless actions. The only way one could behave selflessly in a system like this would be to forget about it for the time being.

If not "forgetting" it, you'd certainly have to figure out a way to not have the reward be factored into the equation. Of course, if the reward is big enough, that's pretty hard. I can rake someone's yard out of the goodness of my heart. If they offer me a nickel to do it, I'm still doing it to be nice and not because I want the five cents. If they offer me $350, it's pretty hard to not have that impact my decision. If fact, I'd probably be telling them not to pay me because the reward seems so disproportionate to the deed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2014, 03:42 PM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(16-12-2014 07:56 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Reason number [I've lost count] why arrogant moral absolutists annoy me.

They annoy me too, because I can't refute them and I don't like what they prove.

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2014, 05:30 PM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(22-12-2014 03:42 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(16-12-2014 07:56 PM)RobbyPants Wrote:  Reason number [I've lost count] why arrogant moral absolutists annoy me.

They annoy me too, because I can't refute them and I don't like what they prove.

That you are too stupid to find the errors don't mean there are no errors to find.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-12-2014, 10:11 PM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(22-12-2014 05:30 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(22-12-2014 03:42 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  They annoy me too, because I can't refute them and I don't like what they prove.

That you are too stupid to find the errors don't mean there are no errors to find.

Ok then, what are the errors? Drinking Beverage

Truth seeker.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-12-2014, 12:02 AM
RE: The Prisoner's Dilemma and Objective/Subjective Morality
(22-12-2014 10:11 PM)diddo97 Wrote:  
(22-12-2014 05:30 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  That you are too stupid to find the errors don't mean there are no errors to find.

Ok then, what are the errors? Drinking Beverage

Feel free to go back and read about 80% of all replies you have ever gotten from every single person on this forum. Pay special attention to the ones you purposly ignore to maintain your illusion that no one has ever proved you wrong. that's a good place to start. If you think I'm stupid enough to waste my time reexplaining things I have explained to you a dozen times over in the past just cause you wondered back in here for another round of public masturbation you are sadly mistaken. I know your game, I'm not playing.

I don't care if you can figure it out, and I've told you before I'm not playing your stupid fucking game. All you get from me is mockery fuck face.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes WhiskeyDebates's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: