The experiment consists in giving two people seated at a table a sum of money and letting them split it. Let's say John and Peter sit at the table. They are given $50. One gets to split the money any way that he wants and the other one has to close the deal by either accepting or declining the offer the other one said. If they agree, they get to keep the money. If not, everybody goes home, empty pocket. Hundreds of "Johns" and "Peters" have joined tables.
The interesting bit is that when our John made a "fair" parting, 50-50, or 60-40, Peter immediately accepted, but when John got a bit selfish, 70-30 in his favor, Peter didn't accept and they both lost. So, Peter could have made $15 as easy as saying yes, but he didn't. Why? What is curious that this experiment was made in Africa too, in some places where $15 is the average income for a month. And still was the same result as in other countries where $15 is not that much of a sum.
Only a clique have accepted the 30 or less percent.
In our everyday life, we consider a deal to be RIGHT if we are treated equally, or better than others, if that is not possible, everybody should suffer, so we are equal in suffering. It invalidates us if it doesn't happen this way. There is a little axiomatic war in pride and vanity here, but not as much importance, than our misconception that rightness is should favor us.
This is why most people are poor, unhappy or depressive. Because they prefer to walk empty handed than seeing other being treated more favorable that they were treated.
This misconception of ours is not only in the financial area, but in all life domains: relationships, friendship, fellowship, etc.
Comment bellow!
No comments:
Post a Comment