Strong Female Protagonist II

[Lethologica]

This isn't prisoner's dilemma. Nor is it leaving "an important piece out". This is a different thought experiment making a different point.

More generally, not all situations where trust and co-operation versus non-co-operation are important questions face the dilemma.

Indeed, mathematically speaking, trying to co-operate to save one guy in the teacher's scenario has strictly worse expected returns than acting in rational self-interest, because it only takes one traitor to doom more than one person.

Strictly speaking, the last paragraph is incorrect: given high enough tendencies towards cooperation and a non-zero value on saving that one guy, cooperation has higher expected returns. But it is true that most of the problem space rapidly converges to a (suboptimal) solution where everyone rationally chooses non-cooperation. Which makes it very like a non-iterative prisoner's dilemma--the difference being that it's the risk of altruism that incentivizes non-cooperation, rather than the guaranteed relative benefits of non-cooperation regardless of the other party's choice.

[Dodom]

I've had plenty of teachers who utilized tactics like this. Granted, the environment was different in that dropping out wasn't an option. But I do think your analysis is faulty because in my experience most teachers playing tricks like this play bait-and-switch. The moment a student starts giving what they want, they stop picking them or change what they want to push them back outside their comfort zone. The only equilibrium that could be reached by your chain of logic is for every student to drop out.

It's not a tactic, because it has no point beside itself. A teacher who intimidates students on purpose is in it for the ego trip, feeling both powerful and too smart for pedagogy. There's no strategy to it, and I've never seen one push a student out of telling them what they want to hear. In my experience, the more a student appears shy, the more often and the harsher they pick on them. If their intent was to promote learning, then they'd change strategy when they see the student is becoming scared of going to class. But no, fear encourages this behaviour, which is pretty sure evidence that the motive is selfish.
As to your equilibrium notion, it would maybe be relevant if school years were not finite in length, and if apathy wasn't one of the possible psychological reactions to excessive stress. As it is, a passive student has the option of waiting it out.

[Frozen_Feet]

You say you've never seen it; but I have. I don't think we're going to get anywhere from this.

[Jane_Smith]

I guess it would be to much to ask for a link of the comic to be added to the first post? - _ -

[Dodom]

You say you've never seen it; but I have. I don't think we're going to get anywhere from this.

Then we're not even talking about the same kind of teachers at all, to begin with.

[Kantaki]

I guess it would be to much to ask for a link of the comic to be added to the first post? - _ -

Not the first post, but there are links for the first and the current page.

[Nettlekid]

I have to say, based on our discussions in this thread, I'm a little disappointed by this most recent page. "Oh, what? I wasn't paying attention. Huh?" isn't as exciting a conclusion as a calculated weighing of whether or not it was advantageous to put whichever stone. I had criticized Lost Demiurge for saying that the students just didn't notice because I was arguing they had deliberately chosen to save themselves rather than band together, but they really did not notice.

[Spojaz]

Someone in this group of strangers is going to pick the white stone, (maybe trolling, confused on the rules, being a jerk, making a point or just using this logic)

Called it!

Any time you assume that everyone in a group of people is paying attention, you are wrong.

[Kantaki]

Called it!

Any time you assume that everyone in a group of people is paying attention, you are wrong.

Sure, but all of them? Okay, that one girl said she choose the white stone because she expected that someone didn't pay attention, but I doubt that is true for all of them.
And did one student seriously say the rules cofused her? Girl, you are in the wrong class.

Either way, this is just sad, only one student recognized the solution and acted on it? Disappointing, very disappointing.
Now I really want to their faces when Gurwara tells them that, no unfortunatly he can't let them pass like that.
Should be funny.

[Lost Demiurge]

I have to say, based on our discussions in this thread, I'm a little disappointed by this most recent page. "Oh, what? I wasn't paying attention. Huh?" isn't as exciting a conclusion as a calculated weighing of whether or not it was advantageous to put whichever stone. I had criticized Lost Demiurge for saying that the students just didn't notice because I was arguing they had deliberately chosen to save themselves rather than band together, but they really did not notice.

Your apology is accepted. :D

Neh, it's a typical college elective class. Half of them won't really be paying attention, a quarter are running on no sleep, and the last quarter, well, some of them will misunderstand the professor or simply not get it.

So yeah, this is realistic to me.

[Morquard]

Don't forget, we literally had weeks since this whole game started, the people in the class maybe 20-30 seconds.

It's also possible that the "I didn't pay attention" and "I was confused by the rules" people just don't want to outright say "Oh, sorry, I don't care for that guy, I'm here for my own grades, and I'm taking the guaranteed A, thank you", because that sounds... well like an *******. Doesn't mean they didn't think it, they just figured playing dumb is better.

[SlyGuyMcFly]

I am completely unsurprised by this outcome. Never bet against stupid, Allison.

[Lethologica]

I have to say, based on our discussions in this thread, I'm a little disappointed by this most recent page. "Oh, what? I wasn't paying attention. Huh?" isn't as exciting a conclusion as a calculated weighing of whether or not it was advantageous to put whichever stone. I had criticized Lost Demiurge for saying that the students just didn't notice because I was arguing they had deliberately chosen to save themselves rather than band together, but they really did not notice.

Of the students we've heard from, half (Alison and the woman in the hijab) made an informed decision, and half didn't. If anything, that seems like a generous result.

[Kantaki]

Of the students we've heard from, half (Alison and the woman in the hijab) made an informed decision, and half didn't. If anything, that seems like a generous result.

Sure, fifty percent isn't that bad (it's still terrible for a philosophy class), but I kinda expect it will get worse.
And it doesn't change the fact that only Alison was willing to take the risk and put down a black stone. That might be fine in a math or business related class, but in philosophy? I would expect a few more black stones.

[Deliverance]

Sure, but all of them? Okay, that one girl said she choose the white stone because she expected that someone didn't pay attention, but I doubt that is true for all of them.
And did one student seriously say the rules cofused her? Girl, you are in the wrong class.

Either way, this is just sad, only one student recognized the solution and acted on it? Disappointing, very disappointing.
Now I really want to their faces when Gurwara tells them that, no unfortunatly he can't let them pass like that.
Should be funny.

Your "only one student recognized the solution and acted on it" shows a remarkably lack of rational thought or a belief in an utterly implausible outcome being a viable solution.

The only rational choice if you don't want to fail the course is to place a white stone. Placing a black stone is never a better choice for yourself with respect to passing, and it is worse for yourself unless each and every other person chooses to place a black stone too. So placing a black stone is risking yourself for the chance that you might save somebody else.

So, assuming you have been paying attention and that you care to save the person at risk (which is not a given in the first place), do you count on everybody else a) having paid attention, b) being willing to risk themselves to save that person, c) not making a mistake, d) not disliking the person who would be saved, e) coming to the same conclusion as you do, f) weighting the risks involved the same way you do, thinking that despite a)-e) the goal of saving somebody else is worth the risk of personal failure if there's anything you haven't thought of that might influence anybody else's choice such that they'd choose white?

The answer is no, not if you have the least insight in how people work. If you do, you'll realize that the more people there are, the more likely it is that at least one person will put down a white stone, and it only takes one. With more than a handful of people and with no time to communicate before acting, it is a virtual certainty that at least one will put down a white stone.

Which means that by that logic just about everybody will put down a white stone if they do think it through. If you want to pass, you place the white stone, because that is the solution to the problem you deem most important: whether you pass or not, not the other problem of whether that other guy would pass or not.

And if people don't think it through? Then they'll choose the white stone to benefit themselves. And if they are confused by the rules? White stone.

A situation where people chose black stones wouldn't show they understood the solution. It would show that they a) didn't understand people, b) acted out of moral imperatives rather than a rational appreciation of the problem on hand, c) thought that this was a thought experiment without any tangible outcome and decided to screw with the experiment or decided that it was an easy way to appear selfless without risking anything, d) showed extreme solidarity with people they hardly knew despite knowing that they would personally suffer for it without helping the one the showed solidarity with, or e) were stupid.

In Alison's case we see a+b acted out live, but it is hardly surprising that none of other students acted on a) through e).


(Okay, it is a bit surprising that none of them went with c), rules lawyering that this had to a be thought experiment where their choice carried no risks, but for the narrative purpose of the comic that had to be the case.)

[Kantaki]

Well, I think I would have choosen the black stone.
Based on a mix of a)-d). Yes, all five.
Plus I would hope others would do the same for me.
Although, considering my luck I'm pretty sure I would be the guy without a white stone.

[Alcibiades]

More problematic than the fact that no one else put up a black stone is that a room full of college students doesn't recognize that this is just a lesson and that a professor can't fail you over the color of a stone you put on your desk.

And I know the present generation of students are generally perceived to be less revolutionary than previous ones, but come on. If they actually believe he's going to fail this one guy for something that wasn't in his control, there'd be a riot.

I guess I can accept Allison is so invested in her ideas that she'd actually get mad at the guy over this, but the fact that she's portrayed as some sort of uniquely altruistic individual really bothers me.

[Maryring]

It isn't that Al is uniquely altruistic. It's that Al is incredibly privileged. She has literally nothing to fear. The power balance is so drastically skewed in her favour that she can't relate to the difficulties of others who do find themselves far more at the mercy of the whims of fate. Ignoring for the sake of the argument that there were no real risk here, because the teacher can't pass or fail a class like this. Allison has nothing to really lose by placing the black stone. She's got cash from merchandising. She's got tons of support from merchandising. If she wanted she could easily live the rest of her life in luxurious comfort because everyone knows and loves one of the greatest heroes in American history. Dark-Skinned-Girl (DSG for short) had everything to lose. From what she had to say, it seems clear to me that her family is struggling financially. Passing or failing this class can have dire consequences for her future, and by extension that of her family. Not only does she have a responsibility to them, but the risks she faced were far greater for her than for Al. And this... difference in power is something Al needs to learn, because she's still incredibly blind to her privileges.

[Nettlekid]

It isn't that Al is uniquely altruistic. It's that Al is incredibly privileged. She has literally nothing to fear. The power balance is so drastically skewed in her favour that she can't relate to the difficulties of others who do find themselves far more at the mercy of the whims of fate. Ignoring for the sake of the argument that there were no real risk here, because the teacher can't pass or fail a class like this. Allison has nothing to really lose by placing the black stone. She's got cash from merchandising. She's got tons of support from merchandising. If she wanted she could easily live the rest of her life in luxurious comfort because everyone knows and loves one of the greatest heroes in American history. Dark-Skinned-Girl (DSG for short) had everything to lose. From what she had to say, it seems clear to me that her family is struggling financially. Passing or failing this class can have dire consequences for her future, and by extension that of her family. Not only does she have a responsibility to them, but the risks she faced were far greater for her than for Al. And this... difference in power is something Al needs to learn, because she's still incredibly blind to her privileges.

I agree with this wholeheartedly, and it's the issue that I'm really hoping this portion of the arc will address. That's why I was so annoyed when the other students in the class appeared to just be ignoring the situation. When Allison's axiom is "we're all in this together" and that people need each other, because working together makes things better for everyone and no one can do everything on their own and people should be treated equally and fairly. So says the superpowered girl who has been physically harmed like once or twice in her life and just learned how to fly, who gained her powers by random chance and not through any personal merit. Her very existence defies her axiom, and she's not really addressing that.

[Officer Joy]

I guess that makes me incredeble privilaged too. Because if I was in that class I would have definitely have taken the fail stone knowing that it is exeptionally unlikely that everyone would.

Because it is worth more to me that everyone knows I'm not selfish than it is to not fail one class.

NOTE; as a nonamerican I am not completely sure how school works. An I'm making the assumption that failing one class doesn't force me to redo a whole year

[Frozen_Feet]

When the perfect solution requires everyone to co-operate perfectly, and co-operating perfectly requires everyone to understand the solution perfectly, it really does become unrealistic to expect the perfect solution to be realized. And if even one person failing or betraying the group screws over everyone who tries to co-operate, trying to save that one guy becomes less worth it the more people are involved.

That's a perfectly workable life lesson on its own.

The rest is just gravy on top.

[Nettlekid]

I guess that makes me incredeble privilaged too. Because if I was in that class I would have definitely have taken the fail stone knowing that it is exeptionally unlikely that everyone would.

Because it is worth more to me that everyone knows I'm not selfish than it is to not fail one class.

NOTE; as a nonamerican I am not completely sure how school works. An I'm making the assumption that failing one class doesn't force me to redo a whole year

You wouldn't have to redo a full year, but anyone who needs to pass the course for their chosen field of study would have to take it again, which means that you lose the chance to take another class you might have liked to. If it was your last year of college then you very easily could have to take an extra year to make it up. I think another issue is that in this girl's case her financial aid could be contingent on having grades or a GPA above a certain threshold, and failing the class could severely jeopardize her ability to stay at the college.

[Maryring]

I guess that makes me incredeble privilaged too. Because if I was in that class I would have definitely have taken the fail stone knowing that it is exeptionally unlikely that everyone would.

Because it is worth more to me that everyone knows I'm not selfish than it is to not fail one class.

NOTE; as a nonamerican I am not completely sure how school works. An I'm making the assumption that failing one class doesn't force me to redo a whole year

You probably are. If you can afford to fail a class, you are already in a finanically secure position. This girl wasn't.

In all honesty. Charity is the privilege of the strong. It is unfair to expect everyone to act the same in any situation (tying back to Al's principle of fairness) because people are different. They come from different backgrounds. They exist in different circumstances. And putting down a black stone is a much, much bigger sacrifice for all of her classmates than it is for Al.

[Morquard]

It isn't that Al is uniquely altruistic. It's that Al is incredibly privileged. She has literally nothing to fear. The power balance is so drastically skewed in her favour that she can't relate to the difficulties of others who do find themselves far more at the mercy of the whims of fate. Ignoring for the sake of the argument that there were no real risk here, because the teacher can't pass or fail a class like this. Allison has nothing to really lose by placing the black stone. She's got cash from merchandising. She's got tons of support from merchandising. If she wanted she could easily live the rest of her life in luxurious comfort because everyone knows and loves one of the greatest heroes in American history. Dark-Skinned-Girl (DSG for short) had everything to lose. From what she had to say, it seems clear to me that her family is struggling financially. Passing or failing this class can have dire consequences for her future, and by extension that of her family. Not only does she have a responsibility to them, but the risks she faced were far greater for her than for Al. And this... difference in power is something Al needs to learn, because she's still incredibly blind to her privileges.

That is a really good point you make there, and one I hadn't considered just like this so far.
It's easier to judge the people involved as an outside observer who has superior information (like us readers) or identifying with one of them (Al in this case most likely, since she's really the only one we know), so I didn't think too hard on how Al could be totally wrong.

I didn't expect all of them to put up black, I knew at least some would be white, but I'm still surprised they're all white. And from the dialog it really seems all were white

[Lateral]

Frankly, I'm sort of appalled that none of these people (who have all taken Intro to Logic, mind you) have apparently ever heard of the prisoner's dilemma. And by the fact that Allison can't seem to recognize a teachable moment when she sees it. I mean, what, does she really think that the professor's going to actually pass or fail students based on this?

...And also that, apparently, Allison is the only one engaged with the class right now. Seriously, nobody else is speaking without being prompted either by Allison or the teacher.

[Frozen_Feet]

This continues to not be a prisoner's dilemma.

In the dilemma, if everyone defects, the return is worse for the defector than if everyone co-operates. Here, a defector is guaranteed a positive outcome by defecting.

Even more, prisoner's dilemma assumes all parties understand the deal and are working on game theoretic principles. The dilemma does not portray a probabilistic scenario where one of the prisoners stopped listening at "if you defect, you go free".

[The Glyphstone]

This continues to not be a prisoner's dilemma.

In the dilemma, if everyone defects, the return is worse for the defector than if everyone co-operates. Here, a defector is guaranteed a positive outcome by defecting.

Even more, prisoner's dilemma assumes all parties understand the deal and are working on game theoretic principles. The dilemma does not portray a probabilistic scenario where one of the prisoners stopped listening at "if you defect, you go free".

The scenario is not a prisoner's dilemma, correct. However, it is so similar that knowledge of the former would have been very useful in determining a course of action in this scenario.

[Traab]

It also helps that literally anyone paying attention in class could have realized that
A) The professor set up this test to try to make a point about Allison's axiom
B) There is no way in hell a substitute teacher is going to be allowed to fail you based on the color of stone you pick
C) This means there is no actual pressure here and you can respond however the heck you actually want to as it doesnt actually matter for anything tangible other than perhaps peoples opinion of you.

But no, they all heard "Free A or fail" and disengaged their brains instantly.

[Lateral]

The scenario is not a prisoner's dilemma, correct. However, it is so similar that knowledge of the former would have been very useful in determining a course of action in this scenario.

Aye. The essence of the prisoner's dilemma is that the logical decision, if you don't know how the other person will choose, is always to defect, because whichever way they choose, defecting results in a better outcome for you than cooperating (no jail time vs one year if they cooperate, two years vs three years if they defect). The same principle applies here, and yet apparently there isn't a single student in this class who would even think to make the comparison.

It also helps that literally anyone paying attention in class could have realized that
A) The professor set up this test to try to make a point about Allison's axiom
B) There is no way in hell a substitute teacher is going to be allowed to fail you based on the color of stone you pick
C) This means there is no actual pressure here and you can respond however the heck you actually want to as it doesnt actually matter for anything tangible other than perhaps peoples opinion of you.

But no, they all heard "Free A or fail" and disengaged their brains instantly.

This is exactly my problem with this scenario. I mean, Allison's pretty naive, but it continues to seem like the writers don't even consider that people who aren't central characters might also have actual thoughts.

[Spojaz]

This is exactly my problem with this scenario. I mean, Allison's pretty naive, but it continues to seem like the writers don't even consider that people who aren't central characters might also have actual thoughts.

This could be another facet of how the people would adjust to superheroes existing. I'm not sure how I could handle news everyday about super-villains and other comic book tragedies. The "I want to help" urge is already diminished with the sheer number and distance away of our current problems, but imagine if you never could do anything about it, and someone empirically better than you has already fixed the problem and left by the time you hear about anything. It would be a great temptation to slide into "that's too bad, I just need to worry about me", no matter the situation.