Essay Questions

What is the Prisoner’s Dilemma?

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a theorem developed by Nash’s college mentor Al Tucker to illustrate real-world applications for the Nash equilibrium relative to game theory. It presents a scenario in which two prisoners involved in the same crime are given the choice of a confession which implicates the other or remaining silent. Since confession is rewarded with a more lenient sentence this leads to the natural conclusion that confessing is the most obvious choice for both prisoners at the level of protecting their own self-interest. The crux of the dilemma is that neither prisoner knows what choice the other is making and the best choice for protecting both one’s own and their partner’s self-interest simultaneously is for neither to confess and both to remain silent.

What foundational economic theory which has been the guiding principle of capitalism for more than two-hundred years does the Prisoner’s Dilemma undermine?

Adam Smith’s works on economic theories in the 18th century have shaped and guided conservative political ideology related to capitalism ever since. The entire concept of fewer government regulations being needed to maintain equilibrium and equity in a free and open market is based upon Smith’s metaphor of an Invisible Hand at work which in some way alchemical way transforms individual pursuit of self-interest into a process which cancels each other out and thus keeps the playing field even. At a very simplistic and microcosmic level, the Prisoner’s Dilemma illustrates the most significance aspect of the Nash equilibrium: the pursuit of self-interest cannot in any way be said to result in the consequence of serving the best interests of all involved.

What does the historical context of Nash’s story suggest about the possibilities of symptomatic development of schizophrenia?

Nash becomes voraciously victimized by a particular sort of the mental illness which typically is specifically referred as paranoid schizophrenia. Not all sufferers of schizoid disorders manifest symptoms of paranoia and certainly not all who do develop them to the degree of Nash. What is of particular interest in Nash’s story is the historical context peculiar to his case. For starters, he is characterized as being especially competitive in his pursuit of career success and competition just naturally produces a certain level of paranoia.

This organic predisposition is further corrupted by Nash taking on a position working for RAND. This national security think tank not only operates at the highest level of political paranoia, but the corporate culture within RAND also serves to foster suspicion among co-workers. And, finally, all this is taking place during the 1950’s era of McCarthyism and the Communist Witch Hunt when mere baseless accusations of being un-American was enough to destroy a career. All these elements working in concert together raise an interesting theoretical possibility of the sort Nash might have enjoyed tackling: had he been a decade later, would his schizophrenia have manifested differently with a less extreme sense of paranoia?