Relationship Between Social Cooperation and Self-Interest

Name

Institution Affiliation

Relationship Between Social Cooperation and Self-Interest

Introduction

What is the prisoners’ dilemma, and what, if anything, does it tell us about the relationship between pursuing our self-interest and engaging in social cooperation?

Since the evolution of man through the different human evolution theory, it has been evident that human beings have always been social animals (Roch & Samuelson, 1997). This meaning that humans always work together in the form of groups to benefit everyone by committing themselves to work towards achieving common goals. In the current modern life, it is required that people should work together to achieve the many desired goals e.g., building large buildings to delivering goods and services. Nevertheless, humans are also motivated by the fact of self-interest, which is always perceived to be a barrier to ensure effective cooperation. This essay tends to explore the concept of the relationship between self-interest and cooperation, and the different processes that help and hinder them.

The Prisoners Dilemma

Imagine being a participant in a social experiment. The information is passed to you that you will be part of play together with another individual in a separate chamber. The other individual is part and person of the same experiment but you will never meet. After experimenting there has been guaranteed that there will be an award of some money. Your unknown partner and you, you have to choose between choosing to cooperate which will in turn maximize the combined reward or defect which means not cooperating and therefore maximizing the individual reward. Which option would you select? Deciding to pursue your self-interest would help you get the promise of the big reward but its also subject to losing everything. On the other hand, cooperating gives the best benefit but its subject to both of the participants showcasing a high level of trust between them.

The above situation, under which the two humans or participants pick between defection and cooperation is referred to as the prisoner’s dilemma. This particular name emanates from a scenario in which two prisoners, having committed a crime are offered a chance to either: (a) both the prisoners have committed a crime to confess their crime and earn themselves a moderate sentence,(b) snitch their accomplice which will earn a lesser sentence, or (c) both of them remain silent and avoid punishment altogether. This scenario of the prisoner’s dilemma has been used in different forms by psychologists to aid in the study and evaluation of cooperation and self-interest. Either outlined as a prison game or a monetary game, the prisoner’s dilemma irradiates the struggle at the center of the cooperation decisions. It depicts the urge and advantage of maximizing personal reward by pursuing self-interest against the motivation of the maximization of benefits for the group i.e., the combination of you and the partner.

Anyone trying to pursue their self-interest with the objective for the maximization of their rewards, the most rational opinion is to not cooperate meaning to defect since defection contributes and leads to a huge individual reward, irrespective of the choice made by your partner. Nevertheless, if the two partners perceive their partnership as a combined effort, in a way that is a mutual relationship, then the best strategy among all remains and stands to be cooperation. This is because it offers the best benefit as opposed to partial cooperation or mutual defection. Thus, even though defecting presents one with the best reward when perceived from an individual point, it also stands to be arguably the worst decision choice to be selected for the whole group.

The distinctive division that dominates between the collective and self-interest is the primary obstacle and barrier which hinders humans from cooperating. Focusing back on the definition that is outlined in this essay: that cooperation involves working together of multiple individuals towards achieving a common goal which will be of benefit to everyone else. It is frequently observed and deduced from such situations outlined above, that even if cooperating would benefit the partnership or the group at large, individuals tend to be able to earn more huge personal benefits when they defect, which is outlined in the example of the prisoner’s dilemma.

The individuals who love music and attend musical concerts, they can be able to relate and observe a real slight world case example concerning the prisoner’s dilemma phenomenon which exists in the live concerts of the music industry. The concerts that have seating areas, many attendants, or the audience will opt to stand, with the perception of getting a better view of the activities taking place on the stage. This action will result in the people who are seated directly behind those who are now on standing will be forced to also stand to be able to see the activities on the stage. This activity will be able to create a reaction chain which will include everyone in the audience to stand so that they can be able to see the stage over the heads of the rest of the crowd that is standing in front of them. While the option of standing will enhance an individual’s personal experience in the concert, it also tends to create a precise hindrance to the rest of the audience hence hurting and disadvantaging the experience of the rest of the group as a whole.

There exist simple models concerning rational self-interest which give a prediction of 100% defection involved in the cooperative tasks. This means that, if humans were interested only in the benefiting and gaining for themselves, there would always be seen a selfish behavior. Instead, there is an astonishing tendency for cooperation in the prisoner’s dilemma and other similar scenarios (Batson & Moran, 1999).

Conclusion

Cooperation exists as a significant element that is associated with our lives daily. In the modern times, every activity of the current social life, starting with the taxes paid to the signs in the roads that we follow, entails multiple and various parties and groups working together in the focus of achieving the common set goals. There exists quite a several factors that assist in evaluating whether humans will positively cooperate, ranging from the trust that they instill in their partners, their culture of origin to the degree at which they empathize with fellow people. Even though achieving cooperation is at times very challenging and difficult, several diplomatic actions, for example engaging in open communication and the emphasis is given on shared goals, is key and significant in promoting and enhancing teamwork and even bringing together rivalries for the common good. While the decision not to cooperate and choosing to pursue a self-interest for the achievement of a greater reward in the short term, cooperation is primarily significant in ensuring the whole group which entails every member of the group achieve the optimal result.

References

Batson, C. D., & Moran, T. (1999). Empathy‐induced altruism in a prisoner’s dilemma. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29(7), 909-924.

Roch, S. G., & Samuelson, C. D. (1997). Effects of environmental uncertainty and social value orientation in resource dilemmas. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 70(3), 221-235.