[CrackMonkey] A cool problem

[Mike Goldman]

Seth David Schoen wrote:

> n people are captured by an adversary and told that, after this scenario
> has been explained to them, they may mutally agree on a strategy (with the
> adversary listening to all their discussions) and then use it to try to
> save as many people as possible.

I've arrived too late to contribute to the straightforward analysis of the
problem, the awe inspiringly correct solution to which has already been provided
by the incomparable Mr. Bad (to whom I bow deeply).  But it seems to me that
there is an unfounded assumption here, that one must A) obey the rules as stated,
and B) expect the adversary to do the same.

In any case, considering the matter metarationally, if I and all of my fellows
cooperate with the game as given to us, we will lend encouragement to the
adversary to continue with his evil scheme to harness our mental powers to his
advantage, while not only denying us fair compensation, but murdering us one or
more at a time, until eventually we shall all not merely be dead, but enslaved
until that time.  It must not be!  No!

We must therefore consider ourselves, as prisoners, bound to cooperate NOT with
our captors, but with one another.  And I think George "Kibo" Perry might have a
few words to say about the parallels between our situation and that of the great
masses in the similarly rigged contest which is our modern corporatist
environment masquerading as a free market.

Our choices are three, and dependent on factors not given in the scenario above,
but determinable by the actual circumstances of the case.  We can choose to
ignore, avoid or fight the adversary.  If the adversary is sufficiently weak to
pose no imminent danger, we can ignore him.  If not, it is fight or flight,
either physical or mental.  That is, we may indeed pretend to cooperate in order
to expose a vulnerability which can later be exploited and enable us to make good
our escape or victory.

Ultimately, the best approach is generally to do what will sap the strength or
inclination of the adversary to harm us, to make him irrelevant, and enable us to
thereafter ignore him.  Fight or flight is always fraught with a great deal more
risk, thus metarationally inferior where the alternative exists.