I meant for the instructor. Classes go by so much quicker when you have a student making intelligent challenges.
No, I still don't value the 2. But down the road the 2+10 could come in handy, or I could just want the 12 because maybe I want to do something extra with it. And even if I don't get the two, it was worth the shot.
It's a phony group. There's no group psychology because you're looking at independent actors and pretending they are some sort of collective.
What, you don't think people will encounter this in life, arbitrary and involuntary grouping? They all chose to take that class without reference or concern as to the other students. They'll probably takes jobs without those types of concerns, either.
Exactly. He's treating it like a prisoners dilemma which it ain't. it's not an all or nothing analysis given the fact that 2 points on one exam might make zero difference in my outcome while 6 is much more likely to chance my grade. Treating the bonus analysis as a separate entity is absurd. It's not a starve or eat situation. It's a eat ok, eat better, eat the best situation.
The only one that would be better is if he could've composed a situation that would've had a scenario in which your choice could've benefited you at the expense of someone else or, possibly, the group. Of course, you can't screw with people's actual grades that way. That discussion would be a very interesting one here.
Makes one wish for a free market and private property rights to were one could buy or sell votes or resources
The last two sentences being the point. Acting as if it says anything that individuals will act as individuals when treated as part of a collective they didn't choose to join is folly.
No. There is no common resource. If there was then there would be a set of x amount of points that would be divided up for each student in the order that they answered the question. In which case if I was the first to answer with 6 I'd take my 6 from the pile. Where as the last who answered would be beholden to the remaining stock, if any. If this were real some people would always get something and 100% of everyone's grades would have to come from the same stock. Which isn't true. Each person goes into this exercise with what they earned regardless of the successes or failures of their counterparts. The only way this works is if you live in a 100% commune with absolutely no ability to multiply and grow your resources in which case you're already screwed before the vote even occurs.
Why? Your classmates are your competitors in the job market. That's like asking if the Lakers would do something that aids them and screws the Celtics or choose a mutually beneficial course of action.
If you don't like them, I'm confident there are a myriad of countries that have no such rule. Living in America is a choice.
I think you're still not getting it. The situation was what it was: all get 2 or 6, unless too many wanted 6 and then nothing. You're modifying the situation to suit an argument that isn't necessary.
No matter your financial situation you would wisely choose five dollars as if you choose ten the odds of you collecting that ten just went down with your one vote. The selfish choice is actually the communal choice as well. Imho
The last two sentences say that people did choose to join that collective, but didn't choose the makeup of that group. Otherwise, I think your position is fine to make, to me. I guess I'm just seeing this as an educator and saying to students to think and make a ****ing argument. In my opinion, the question has no value if it doesn't force people to do so. Clearly, it does.
