[ExI] we aren't the world

Brent Allsop brent.allsop at canonizer.com
Wed Feb 27 04:46:25 UTC 2013


Interesting piece.  If I was the first player, I would always offer an 
even 50/50 split.  But if I was the one that received an offer of even 
the smallest possible amount, I would still accept it.

But a personal belief of mine probably has significant effect on the way 
I behave in any such cases.  This belief is that some day perfect 
justice for all will be achieved.  In other words, if a dude offered me 
$1, and wanted to keep $99, and if I accepted.  In heaven, the future, 
he would have to make a restitution, to make things fair, and pay me 
back, including interest.  If that is deemed by future Gods, to be just, 
anyway.  If not, then I wouldn't care anyway.  In other words, I believe 
in building up rewards in heaven, by doing such give of myself to others 
as much as possible way.  And my kids are going to owe me big time for 
creating them!

What does everyone else think about such, and what choices would you make?

Brent Allsop

On 2/26/2013 9:27 PM, spike wrote:
> This is a long article, but the interesting part of it is stated in 
> the first four or five paragraphs:
> http://www.psmag.com/magazines/pacific-standard-cover-story/joe-henrich-weird-ultimatum-game-shaking-up-psychology-economics-53135/
> The game goes like this:  a test subject is given 100 bucks.  She must 
> offer some of it to a second player, any amount she chooses.  If the 
> second player accepts, they second player gets the amount offered and 
> the first gets whatever is left.  If the second player refuses, then 
> both players get nothing.
> What a cool game!
> The article tells of Americans and their typical way of playing, the 
> way I would play under those circumstances: offer the second player 50 
> bucks.  Good chance she would take it and we both get 50.  But if I am 
> the second player and some greedy bastard offers me 40, I might gently 
> explain where to stuff her 60 bucks.
> In any case, I never would have guessed it: an entire population was 
> found who play the game far differently.  In this ultimatum game, the 
> Peruvian first players would typically offer way less, and the second 
> players would usually accept.  Fascinating!  I never thought about it, 
> but it explains why we have soooo many lawyers in the US.
> Europeans among us, how would you play that game?  If I offered you 
> 40, would you take it?
> I thought of a cool experiment: we get some number of players, each 
> kick in 100 bucks.  Then each player gets to be the first player once 
> and the second player once. Every pair of players gets to negotiate 
> anonymously online, so an annoyed loser will never come to your office 
> and whoop your ass.  It would be a zero sum game: in those cases where 
> there was a refusal, the 100 bucks would go into a pot which would be 
> divided evenly among the players after everyone has played their two 
> rounds.  When you are the first player and you draw a wimp and you 
> play aggressively, you might get 60, then the next round some 
> fair-minded soul offers you 50 which you accept, so now you are at 110 
> plus perhaps another 20 to 30 bucks as your share from the hotheads 
> who couldn't negotiate their way out of a wet paper sack.
> spike
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20130226/79f22b4b/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list