In the past, I have learned about Game Theory and the Prisoner’s Dilemma through my other Jepson classes such as Dr. Von Reuden’s Leadership and the Social Sciences and Dr. Coestee’s Justice and Leadership Class, however the in depth analysis of numerous concepts and premises for Game Theory in Rock, Paper, and Scissors was interesting and eye opening. One of the first major points Len Fisher makes that struck me was the idea that in a sense, all the dilemmas discussed are the same dilemma and the only total solution would be absolute cooperation (Fisher 56). This solution seems so simple, however based on the number of opinions and actions performed by each and every person, total cooperation seems impossible. Aside from this idea, I found the Volunteer’s Dilemma, and the single word description of “mamihlapinatapai” to be very interesting and quite relatable. In order to describe the prisoner’s dilemma, the Yagán Indians of Tierra del Fuego invented the term “mamihlapinatapai,” which literally means “looking at each other hoping that the other will offer to do something that both parties desire to have done but are unwilling to do themselves” (Fisher 76). To further prove how accurate and relatable this definition is, the 1993 Guinness Book of Records labeled it as the “most succinct” word in any language. Game theorists view this dilemma as a multi person version of the prisoner’s dilemma. Fisher used relatable examples to allow readers to further understand the Volunteer’s Dilemma including siblings who must choose who cleans up or has to take the garbage out. Through the introduction of the word “mamihlapinatapai” and engaging examples, Fisher helps readers understand the Volunteer’s Dilemma surrounds us, and various new social pressures.
The volunteer dilemma is an interesting concept to consider. However, it also poses the question whether if it is a dilemma or a simple fact of life?
The Volunteer’s Dilemma is an interesting one, especially when the author frames the problem in the real-life situations (like road rage). I feel like on a daily basis, we encounter volunteer’s dilemma situations we don’t even realize– like in a group project when no one steps up to the plate to do the work.
I have been on both end’s of the Volunteer’s dilemma (and suffered consequences in both roles), but I never considered it was a concept studied in Game theory. I also think it’s funny that we conclude learning how we need to improve trust mechanisms to help avoid/solve these dilemmas, but in the Volunteer’s Dilemma, whichever individual volunteers will more than likely lose trust in their peers for not doing the same for them.
In the reading, I understand that the volunteer dilemma occurs everyday. It can be small things such as doing a group project or preventing a house fire. The decision of how much self-sacrifice to give can have a minimal outcome or it could be something great such as saving someone’s life.
I also thought it was interesting that the author said all of the dilemmas are a consequence of the lack of cooperation and communication. But, if all of these problems derive from the same source, do they all have the same solution as well? I also agree that total cooperation is impossible, but I don’t think total cooperation is need for success, only partial.