From: "jasper beckeringh" <jj.beckeringh-AT-quicknet.nl>
Subject: Re: prisoner's dilemma defined
Date:   Tue, 17 Apr 2001 14:19:04 +0200


I'd like to add that N. would probably see it as weak to confess to go
against your own believes, and as strong to sit out the interogations and
stick to your own believes.

N. would however act according to that option that works the most positive
for him, without concern for the other, but as said before there a more
measurements than the time that has to be spend in prison to take into
account here.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kathryn Koromilas" <kkor-AT-dolnet.gr>
To: <nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2001 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: prisoner's dilemma defined


> hi, it has been years since i read nietzsche so i can't back up anything,
> but just from memory...
>
> Michal Klincewicz wrote:
>
> > What is the cost of betrayal? Is
> > it a symptom of slave-morality to betray the other? Is it a betrayal of
> the
> > self to betray the other? What would determine self-interest?
>
> i get the feeling that anyone working within a nietzschean framework would
> certainly act in self-interest, but not by confessing in order to get
> released asap. i figure heshe would stick to whatever it was heshe
believed
> and stick out the torture and in this sense preserve whatever sense of
self
> heshe had.
>
> i guess that slave-morality is more about betraying oneself in order to
look
> good in front of the other, rather than exactly betraying the other.
>
> the slave, i guess, would give up all beliefs and confess. and though,
heshe
> would get let off (ah freedom!), heshe essentially becomes entrapped in a
> morality that rewards fear and weakness. after all, one would confess only
> out of fear.
>
> kathryn
>
>
>
> --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>



	--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---