Personal assessment (Short essay)
Every participant must then write a short essay that will reflect the game and the activities from the perspective of philosophy of science. First, you are supposed to summarize your own personal reflection of the game in a short personal assessment. Focus on what has been the most interesting issue of the game for your own and whether your strategy would differ if you would negotiate again. Second, think about the game and its outcome from a broader perspective. Pick-up one of the following question and try to evaluate the outcome from that point of view.
Relevant questions for discussion:
- Was the negotiated proposal rational?
- Was the choice of the winning proposal motivated by the facts? Do facts matter in decisions or there are other, possibly more important factors?
- What was the role of arguments and what of rhetoric in the persuasion process?
- How did the choices the group took (on what is true or the final decision) reflect the practical aspect of the problem and the state of scientific knowledge of economics?
- Was there a clear divide between what is the problem and which theory is to be used for its solution?
- What is the Fact-Value distinction and is there one?
- Was the decision proposed ethically good?
- Is there a difference between the ethically good decision and the rational decision? Wherein lies the difference?
- Was there something suboptimal about the decision procedure?
The length of the essay (including personal statement) should be 1000 words. Not much more please. If the length is exceeded by more than 10%, we reserve our right to decrease the points by some penalty.