This article analyses the apparent parallelism between cases, one of which takes place from the deliberate breach of principles, while the other is that in which a less than optimal result is reached through a lack of cooperation — the so-called prisoner’s dilemma. The author demonstrates that in spite of apparent similarities between the two cases, there nevertheless exists a fundamental difference which does not allow them to be classed as the same. On the other hand, the reasoning behind both of these situations may be explained by resorting to a type ofprinciple or maxim which can best be described as finding a middle way. The basic structural difference between the two types may be described as follows: if the hypothesis seems probable, the given principle will condition the decision in different situations and on different levels of thought.
PRINCIPLES, CONVICTIONS, RATIONALITY, BEHAVIOR, DECISION, OPTIMAL DECISION, RISK, DILEMMA, PRISONER’S DILEMMA