Today in our History 9 class we continued studying the English Civil war and we began comparing Thomas Hobbes and John Locke two men who wrote their own takes on different government issues such as the State of Nature or the Power of the State. After going over their points of view we began to play a game called the Prisoner's Dilemma, as a reward we would get a cake.
After playing this game I truly began to revaluate myself as a person, originally a Locke-ian I was distraught after actually proving Hobbes right.
I truly think our decisions were correct and we thought as “Men of our time” in the sense that anyone would have thought like this due to the fact that the objective of the game was to win and the decisions you made impacted the game as a whole, so any sane person would have mad more decisions in favor of their team rather than the other team. I think that our team was honestly mostly motivated by winning the cake and actually making good decisions in order to get the cake, despite the fact that we didn’t think of the everyone trust each other technique.
All in all I thought that we made the correct decisions and although they supported Hobbes’ ideal that all men want to kill each other the idea of being in a team really brings me to question how this would be applied in real life, on a governmental scale. After a quick reflection I have come to see the wrong of my ways even though I think that we made decisions “for the team” and that only a saint would have done differently, I think that next time more rational thinking could have really fortified our chances of winning.
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke