You and your friend have been arrested for robbing the Hibernia Savings Bank and placed in separate isolation cells. Both of you care much more about your personal freedom than about the welfare of your accomplice. A clever prosecutor makes the following offer to each. “You may choose to confess or remain silent. If you confess and your accomplice remains silent I will drop all charges against you and use your testimony to ensure that your accomplice does serious time. Likewise, if your accomplice confesses while you remain silent, they will go free while you do the time. If you both confess I get two convictions, but I'll see to it that you both get early parole. If you both remain silent, I'll have to settle for token sentences on firearms possession charges. If you wish to confess, you must leave a note with the jailer before my return tomorrow morning.”
If your accomplice confesses too, you would still be convicted and jailed. Just released earlier than if you were to not confess, but your accomplice did.
If your accomplice confesses too, you would still be convicted and jailed. Just released earlier than if you were to not confess, but your accomplice did.
Every other option has 100% chance of some time. Only that one has a 50% chance of none.
The answer is basically in the OP. "Both of you care much more about your personal freedom" - if both of us care much more about himself, no one would risk to remain silent. I'd confess.
I had to answer this very same question in my biology symbiosis class in reference to "cheating" symbionts. Even if the smaller symbiont cheats (reaps the benefits from the host without giving anything up [equivalent to confessing here and ratting out your partner after benefitting from the crime]) and lives, it is usually killed in nature by double crossing the wrong host
