Brian Skyrms? Evolution of the Social Contract

1637 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The importance of justice in human society

Skyrms’ book, Evolution of the Social Contract, offers a compelling explanation as to why individuals, when placed with one-shot prisoner’s dilemmas, will often cooperate, or choose the equilibrium that will benefit both parties equally. He uses examples to outline how individuals of certain environments frequently engage in activities that benefit the group at their own personal expense. Using both game theory and decision theory, Skyrms explores problems with the social contract when it is applied to evolutionary dynamics. In the chapters of the book, he offers new insights into concepts such as sex and justice, commitment, and mutual aid.
Skyrms’ writing goes beyond traditional game theory, and exposes some weaknesses in its application. He rejects the theory’s traditional interpretation of rational actors and actions by discovering some glaring inconsistencies. Skyrms conducted a number of experiments using one-shot prisoners’ dilemmas. The ultimatum the author introduces in the first chapter serves as a simple example of a one-shot prisoners’ dilemma. In the initial form of the example, Skyrms proposes there is a cake that must be divided between two individuals. Each individual is looking to maximize his or her utility, and therefore, wants as much of the cake as possible. However, there is a third party, or what Skryms labels a “referee.” The two individuals must determine the percentage or portion of the cake they want and summit these requests to the referee. The percentages must not exceed 100%, or the referee will consume all the cake. It is therefore not in either parties’ best interest to request a significantly large portion. Additionally, if the total of the two requests is below 100% of the cake, the referee will take the left-over portion. The two parties will then aim to maximize their portion, however the best claim that an individual submits is dependent upon the other party’s claim. There are two interacting optimization problems (Skyrms 3, 4).
An answer to the puzzle will be found in solutions that are in equilibrium. An equilibrium in informed rational self-interest, or a Nash equilibrium, is any solution to the problem whereby neither party could do better by altering its position. However, this is a general and broad definition. Further stipu...

... middle of paper ...

...as formed certain signals and understandings that are critical to our prospects for cooperation and negotiation today (Skyrms 80-104).
Skyrms’ explorations in Evolution of the Social Contract are based on the premise that human beings are, in fact, inclined to behave justly. His writings do not aim to prove that individuals act justly all the time; however they assert that the disposition exists in societies. Many would take issue with Skyrms’ assertion. Firstly, justice has many interpretations. According to some, equal division of a resource is not always what justice requires. Skyrms fails to address situations where an individual may have worked harder than another for a resource, and invested more time in it. Perhaps one individual would obtain more utility from a given amount of a resource than another would. Libertarians would demand property rights, and argue that one individual might better utilize the resource than the other, creating more benefit for society. Skyrms also fails to give specific interpretations of justice and does not offer any thoughts on what ideas of justice, if any, are cultural universals.

Show More
Related

  • Analysis Of John Rawls Moralism And Utilitarianism

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    Contractarianism is based on the concept that “actions are morally right just because they are permitted by rules that free, equal, and rational people would agree to live by, on the condition that others obey these rules as well” (Johnson, ‘Sept’ 2). In more simplistic terms, this theory states that actions are morally permissible if they benefit

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes V For Vendetta

    1604 Words  | 4 Pages

    To begin, philosophy, which means the love of wisdom, is the study of knowledge. The study of philosophy has evolved and is continually growing, however its foundations are firmly rooted in classical philosophers and their valuable attributions to the field of study.. Thomas Hobbes’ was a political philosopher alive in the 1500’s. One of his main inquiries as a philosopher was to establish a way for humans to co-exist peacefully. (Reid, Jeffrey) Hobbes conception of the social contract will be briefly introduced, as his understanding will serve as the definition of social contract for the purpose of this paper. Hobbes contemplated how and why human beings acted the way they do through two differing approaches.. Hobbes examined the difference between the right of nature and the law of nature. To explore the right of nature Hobbes explained that “if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies; and in the way to their end (which is principally their own conservation, and sometimes their delectation

    Read More

  • Analysis Of Joshua Greene's Moral Tribes

    1000 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Part I, Moral Problems, Greene relates Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons” to compare individualistic and collectivistic interests. In the “Tragedy of the Commons”, a single group of herders shares a hypothetical common pasture. Hardin posits that, were everyone to act for his or her individual self-interests, the pasture would be eroded and nothing would be left (19). Collective interests should triumph over individual interests whenever possible (24).

    Read More

  • Pros And Cons Of Social Contract Theory

    969 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hobbes presents a scenario in which there is no government, no power to enforce will on others. (2014 The Fundamentals of Ethics, p.197) In such scenario, people live solitary and in deplorable conditions minded to compete mercilessly. Hobbes refers to the state of nature as the war of all against all. As we have seen, in The Prisoner’s Dilemma, both thieves betrayal, would do the worst on their own.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes’ Law of Justice

    2592 Words  | 6 Pages

    Of Thomas Hobbes’ 19 laws of nature, the first three, which add consecutively up to his concept of justice, are by far the most influential and important, with the ultimate goal being an escape from the state of nature. The first law states that we should seek peace, and if we cannot attain it, to use the full force of war. Directly building off of the first law’s mandate to seek peace is the second law that states that we should lay down our rights of nature and form social contracts, if others are willing to as well. From this springs forth the concept of the covenant, in which men can transfer their rights of nature between each other and which forms the basis of moral obligation. With the enactment of each of these laws, which act as impediments towards the full use of an individual’s right of nature, an individual will trade a piece of their right of nature in order to promote cooperation between others. According to Hobbes, these two are not enough to keep human kind from betraying one another. There needs to be another layer of control. This is where the third law comes in to fully form the concept of justice. The third law simply states that men need to perform their valid covenants, which becomes Hobbes’ definition of justice. From this, injustice is defined as not performing your valid covenants. As can be seen by this, with one law building off of another, it is quite clear that Hobbes put great effort into creating a full representation of the world in order to support his political doctrine. Thus, in order to understand Hobbes’ reasoning for his concept of justice, this paper will elaborate on how Hobbes’ laws of nature are rules that every human being should follow in order to give them the best chance of living well as well as investigating the full requirements of justice and Hobbes’ claim that there is neither injustice nor justice in a state of nature. Finally, while Hobbes wove his concepts of the state of nature, the laws of nature and justice into an extremely tight web through the Euclidean method, I argue that his account for justice is too weak to account for social atrocities such as slavery, religious discrimination, animal cruelty, genocide and murder and thus it is my intent to show that his account of justice is inadequate.

    Read More

  • Rawl's "A Theory of Justice": Defining the Fairness Theory

    1884 Words  | 4 Pages

    In A Theory of Justice, Rawls attempts to provide an alternative to belief in utilitarianism and intuitionism with the justice as fairness theory. Rawls defines justice as fairness as the choices made in the original position, saying, “They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality defining the fundamental terms of their association...This way of regarding the principles of justice we shall call justice as fairness.”(10) By assuming people in the original position could only make rational, unbiased judgements, Rawls claims principles reached in this position would be the most just. Considering the veil of ignorance creates a lack of knowledge about individual positions and personal conceptions of the good, choices in the original position are limited in ability to unfairly distribute economic and political advantages. Although named justice as fairness, Rawls theory does not attempt to redistribute primary goods among all member of society, rather it only attempts to show how the principles chosen in the original principle would benefit all members of society. With the introduction of the original position, Rawls intends to show how justice as fairness is a more attractive choice than utilitarianism.

    Read More

  • Examples Of Distributive Justice

    1851 Words  | 4 Pages

    As humans, we have innate and strongly held feelings regarding what we consider fair. This idea of fairness is held in high regard by many people and can greatly affect their satisfaction in life. Fairness is fundamental to our ideas of justice. There are two concepts of justice that people hold. These are retributive justice and distributive justice. Retributive justice concerns the distribution of rewards and punishments based on what people deserve. This type of justice is applied on an individual basis. Distributive justice, on the other hand, is applied across society and is the type of justice that directly appeals to our sense of fairness in life. Distributive justice concerns the distribution of benefits in society, as well as the duties that come with these benefits. It specifically entails that resources in a society should be fairly distributed to all members of society. Distributive justice is a highly debated topic, especially in ethics and morality. Despite people having very strong feelings regarding what is fair, and how fairness affects our lives, moral theories can not reach a consensus regarding what method of distributive justice appeals to our sense of fairness and why. One popular moral theory that has

    Read More

  • Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher

    1118 Words  | 3 Pages

    Principled negotiation allows disputants to obtain what they are entitled to, while enabling them to be fair, at the same time protecting against those who would take advantage of their fairness . Although the points made are logical and indeed a great approach to certain types of conflict, I found that in some cases the method did not completely come together. More than anything, I found the method altogether was simplistic and for an ideal situation. While going through the four elements, I shall illustrate these points.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The State Of Nature

    1216 Words  | 3 Pages

    In his famous book, Leviathan, English scholar Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) describes to readers the “state of nature”, a depiction where mankind exists in an uncivilized, lawless society where fear of eminent death reign. In his words the state of nature represents a “war of all against all, in which the life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Shafer-Landau 197). In order to escape such a life man must band together into a commonwealth where they trade unlimited freedom for the prospect of cooperation and increased quality of life. This trade-off is based off the complexities of the situation known as the prisoner’s dilemma, which weighs the value of self-interest versus cooperation. In general,

    Read More

  • The Social Contract Tradition: Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau

    7326 Words  | 15 Pages

    ABSTRACT: The classical contract tradition of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau have enjoyed such fame and acceptance as being basic to the development of liberal democratic theory and practice that it would be heretical for any scholar, especially one from the fringes, to critique. But the contract tradition poses challenges that must be given the flux in the contemporary socio-political universe that at once impels extreme nationalism and unavoidable globalism. This becomes all the more important not in order to dislodge the primacy of loyalty and reverence to this tradition but from another perspective which hopes to encourage that the anchorage of disclosure be implemented. The contract tradition makes pronouncements on what is natural and what is nonnatural. It offers what many have contended are rigorous arguments for these pronouncements that are "intuitive," "empirical," "logical," "psychological," "moral," "religio-metaphysical." What I offer in this essay is a challenge from the outside. I ask: 1) on what empirical data are the material presuppositions of contractarianism built? 2) what is the epistemological foundation of contractarianism? 3) is contractarianism not derivable from any other form of sociological presupposition except that of the state of nature? 4) does any human know a "state of nature"? 5) given the answers to the above questions, to what extent are the legal and moral foundations of contractarianism sacrosanct? I attempt to answer these questions in what can only be a sketch, but my answers suggest that it is very presumptuous of contractarianist to suppose that they have captured the only logically valid basis of democratic practice universally.

    Read More

  • Understanding Dawkins' Controversial 'Selfish Gene' Theory

    697 Words  | 2 Pages

    In this sense, the parenting gene may risk or give up something to allow for more success of the offspring replicated gene. He compares this behavior to parenting, expressing how parents take risks in order to help protect their child. Altruism occurs between related and unrelated species, and the connection lies behind cooperation that will allow one or both parties to reap rewards. This concept is tied to the concept of the prisoner’s dilemma; where in cooperation, two individuals receive shorter sentences in prison, but if one acts selfishly, he receives reduced time and the other more time. In nature, the Tit-for-Tat strategy – where something is given in return for something received – reveals cooperation. And in these examples, Sexton illustrates Dawkins’ theory.

    Read More

  • Gy Case Study

    775 Words  | 2 Pages

    The authors, Roger Fisher and William Fury, encourages readers to view negotiations as a value add activity, rather than a competing activity. Parties involved in a negotiations should collaborate to reach a win-win situation, rather than take the stand of adversaries. To do so, it is essential to separate people from the problems – i.e. attack the problem and not the people. The following are problems exists among people:

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Social Contract Theory

    891 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes creates a clear idea of the social contract theory in which the social contract is a collective agreement where everyone in the state of nature comes together and sacrifices all their liberty in return to security. “In return, the State promises to exercise its absolute power to maintain a state of peace (by punishing deviants, etc.)” So are the power and the ability of the state making people obey to the laws or is there a wider context to this? I am going to look at the different factors to this argument including a wide range of critiques about Hobbes’ theory to see whether or not his theory is convincing reason for constantly obeying the law.

    Read More

  • Contractualism In A Utopian Society Essay

    747 Words  | 2 Pages

    Contractualism is thought to be defined as, the rationality which we hold to respect people, justifying our reasons and actions to each individual person assuming that we are always right. In today’s society, people (though we may not see it) are strongly segregated. Whether it be by race, religion, job, income, family size, etc. Because of this, we will all have different morals and values, yet we are expected to obey and follow someone else’s views who obtain a higher power, therefore making it justifiable for everyone. In a utopian society, people would be able to make and justify their own values; standing strong without being influenced by others, people not be objectified by their jobs, and would have freedom of religion.

    Read More

  • Multilateralism and Small Developing States

    3341 Words  | 7 Pages

    Spangler, Brad. "Integrative or Interest-Based Bargaining." Beyond Intractability. Eds. Guy Burgess and Heidi Burgess. Conflict Information Consortium, University of Colorado, Boulder. Posted: June 2003 .

    Read More

More about Brian Skyrms? Evolution of the Social Contract

Open Document