The Prisoner's Dilemma is a ethical quandary. In short, two prisoners are arrested with a minor amount of evidence against them. If neither squeal, they get a light sentence (1 year for example). If both squeals, they both get medium sentences (2 years) , if only one squeals, the squealer goes free while the upstanding criminal gets a heavy sentence (3 years).
Each individual prisoner is better off if they squeal: if you don't squeal you will either get 1 year or 3 years, if you do squeal you will either get 0 years or 2 years. Yet, people do not squeal. In real life, many, many criminals are offered something very close to this, yet they do not rat. Most humans understand why this happens, it's a recognition of an unspoken contract and sticking to it because you realize the group as a whole is better off. (Note, religion has nothing to do with it - these prisoners are not afraid God will punish them for squealing. )
But not everyone does keep silent. Some people do squeal. They do so because they think it is better to take advantage of the unspoken social contract, rather than to obey it.
There is a psychological word for these people: "sociopath". Sociopaths recognize what they are doing and feel guilt about it, but they do it anyway. They are not pyschopaths - who feel no guilt and may not even understand why it is wrong. Sociopath simply thinks that while society benefits from the unspoken social contracts, they personally are better off if they break it - just like the Prisoner's Dilemma.
A friend recently sent me a video from a man named Jordan Preston, claiming that religion was the only reason not to commit a crime (squeal). Jordan is wrong, and is in fact a sociopath. He knows about the unspoken social contract, but thinks there is no reason for anyone to follow it.
The reason most people do not commit crimes is not, as Preston thinks, only God. Instead it is four fold.
First, the unspoken contract - I agree not to murder, steal, cheat, etc. because I want other people not to murder, steal, cheat against me.
Second, even if I am a sociopath, I also understand that the government has created a legal system, complete with cops, judges, lawyers, etc. to enforce the social contract, at least the parts they wrote down. As such, I must take into account the chance of being caught and punished for my crimes.
Third is the social disproval, should I be found out. This applies to all of the unspoken contract, even the stuff not written down as law. I.E. Should you skip the line, people will get upset and you know it. If people get too upset, they can even riot and/or lynch you. See the poor black men that were lynched for decades (even centuries) after the American civil war - they broke the vile rules white men enforced even if they were not written down as laws. Or see the parts of Mexico where vigilante citizen groups are in a war against the cartels.
Fourth, one of the advantages of religion is (as Mr. Preston pointed out), to convince people that even if our faulty legal system doesn't catch you and punish you, God will.
For someone to commit a crime, the following has to happen:
1) They must either be a sociopath, or be pushed out of the social contact by others (i.e. if no one is willing to sell you food, you will steal it rather than starve).
2) They must also be willing to risk the legal system - they must believe the potential gain outweighs the risk of legal punishment.
3) They must also be willing to risk illegal revenge by a lynch mob. Generally this risk is relatively small if the legal system is strong, but where the legal system is weak, this risk increases.
4) Finally, they also must believe God will not punish them (or much rarely, that the punishment would be worth it.)
These situations are rare. Less than 1 in 20 people decide to commit a crime, at least in America. But Religion is the last and weakest of the stopgaps.
Usually if you are capable of believing in God, you are also capable of believe in the social contract. It takes a lot of education to convince a sociopath that God is real and that they will punish you for evil you do. It's not impossible, but it does happen. Many sociopaths become atheists, but that does NOT mean that many atheists are sociopaths. All lions are cats does not mean all cats are lions - most cats are house pets.
When you fail to understand that atheists have lots of very good reasons not to commit crimes, you are not being 'rational', as Mr. Preston claims, instead you are being sociopathic. Failing to understand the basic unspoken social contract.
This is all made worse by one simple factor: Religion does control people's behavior, but there is nothing stopping Religion from being used to make people do evil rather than good. And throughout history, every single major religion has been used to do evil. Every religion has a Spanish Inquisition, jihadists, or similar fanatical extremists that break the law in the name of God. Mormons - some of the least criminal people in the world - have a history of murdering people and blaming Indians. Even Buddhists attack Muslims in Myanmar. Religion's ability to control people is not always good.
Many atheists believe that the good religion has done is outweighed by the bad. There is no way to actually tell if this is true, but crime statistics in atheist countries support this belief. (https://www.quora.com/Are-atheists-more-or-less-likely-to-be-criminals-than-theists)
Each individual prisoner is better off if they squeal: if you don't squeal you will either get 1 year or 3 years, if you do squeal you will either get 0 years or 2 years. Yet, people do not squeal. In real life, many, many criminals are offered something very close to this, yet they do not rat. Most humans understand why this happens, it's a recognition of an unspoken contract and sticking to it because you realize the group as a whole is better off. (Note, religion has nothing to do with it - these prisoners are not afraid God will punish them for squealing. )
But not everyone does keep silent. Some people do squeal. They do so because they think it is better to take advantage of the unspoken social contract, rather than to obey it.
There is a psychological word for these people: "sociopath". Sociopaths recognize what they are doing and feel guilt about it, but they do it anyway. They are not pyschopaths - who feel no guilt and may not even understand why it is wrong. Sociopath simply thinks that while society benefits from the unspoken social contracts, they personally are better off if they break it - just like the Prisoner's Dilemma.
A friend recently sent me a video from a man named Jordan Preston, claiming that religion was the only reason not to commit a crime (squeal). Jordan is wrong, and is in fact a sociopath. He knows about the unspoken social contract, but thinks there is no reason for anyone to follow it.
The reason most people do not commit crimes is not, as Preston thinks, only God. Instead it is four fold.
First, the unspoken contract - I agree not to murder, steal, cheat, etc. because I want other people not to murder, steal, cheat against me.
Second, even if I am a sociopath, I also understand that the government has created a legal system, complete with cops, judges, lawyers, etc. to enforce the social contract, at least the parts they wrote down. As such, I must take into account the chance of being caught and punished for my crimes.
Third is the social disproval, should I be found out. This applies to all of the unspoken contract, even the stuff not written down as law. I.E. Should you skip the line, people will get upset and you know it. If people get too upset, they can even riot and/or lynch you. See the poor black men that were lynched for decades (even centuries) after the American civil war - they broke the vile rules white men enforced even if they were not written down as laws. Or see the parts of Mexico where vigilante citizen groups are in a war against the cartels.
Fourth, one of the advantages of religion is (as Mr. Preston pointed out), to convince people that even if our faulty legal system doesn't catch you and punish you, God will.
For someone to commit a crime, the following has to happen:
1) They must either be a sociopath, or be pushed out of the social contact by others (i.e. if no one is willing to sell you food, you will steal it rather than starve).
2) They must also be willing to risk the legal system - they must believe the potential gain outweighs the risk of legal punishment.
3) They must also be willing to risk illegal revenge by a lynch mob. Generally this risk is relatively small if the legal system is strong, but where the legal system is weak, this risk increases.
4) Finally, they also must believe God will not punish them (or much rarely, that the punishment would be worth it.)
These situations are rare. Less than 1 in 20 people decide to commit a crime, at least in America. But Religion is the last and weakest of the stopgaps.
Usually if you are capable of believing in God, you are also capable of believe in the social contract. It takes a lot of education to convince a sociopath that God is real and that they will punish you for evil you do. It's not impossible, but it does happen. Many sociopaths become atheists, but that does NOT mean that many atheists are sociopaths. All lions are cats does not mean all cats are lions - most cats are house pets.
When you fail to understand that atheists have lots of very good reasons not to commit crimes, you are not being 'rational', as Mr. Preston claims, instead you are being sociopathic. Failing to understand the basic unspoken social contract.
This is all made worse by one simple factor: Religion does control people's behavior, but there is nothing stopping Religion from being used to make people do evil rather than good. And throughout history, every single major religion has been used to do evil. Every religion has a Spanish Inquisition, jihadists, or similar fanatical extremists that break the law in the name of God. Mormons - some of the least criminal people in the world - have a history of murdering people and blaming Indians. Even Buddhists attack Muslims in Myanmar. Religion's ability to control people is not always good.
Many atheists believe that the good religion has done is outweighed by the bad. There is no way to actually tell if this is true, but crime statistics in atheist countries support this belief. (https://www.quora.com/Are-atheists-more-or-less-likely-to-be-criminals-than-theists)
