I think Philosophy should not only dissect and analyze the world as it is but also serve as an idea/discussion for hoe the world could potentially be. The critical approach often leaves us stuck in perpetual deconstruction without offering a path forward. Class discussion and the imagination of others allows us to critique. We can together envision multiple futures/solutions, and social structures that are more just and meaningful.

Here’s a more streamlined version of your scenario:

In class, another student and I were presented with a pile of money and given three options. We could either steal the money or leave it. If we both chose to steal, we would both end up with nothing. If we both left the money, neither of us would get anything either. However, if one of us stole and the other left the money, the person who stole would get the money, while the other would walk away with nothing. For me, this scenario is a reflection of both philosophical dilemmas and social constructs, particularly in the context of game theory and moral philosophy. It echoes the Prisoner’s Dilemma, a situation where individual self-interest leads to worse outcomes for both parties than cooperation would. This scenario also reflects the role of trust in social interactions. If neither party trusts the other to act cooperatively, both might choose to steal, resulting in mutual loss. Social structures like laws, norms, and ethical guidelines exist to cultivate trust and reduce the risks of selfish behavior, enabling cooperation.