Article: Philosopher Attacks Self-Interest, article on Elizabeth S. Anderson from thecrimson.com "In the traditional version of the prisoner’s dilemma, two accused prisoners are offered a chance to confess. If one confesses and the other does not, the confessor will be released immediately and the co-conspirator will spend 20 years in prison. If both confess, they each face a sentence of 15 years. If, on the other hand, neither talks, both will be freed in just a few months. Self-interest dictates that each should confess. But if both act on their self-interest, the prisoners’ fate is worse than if they had acted with each other’s interest in mind."

Book: Truth & Truthfulness: An Essay in Genealogy, Bernard Williams Article: Richard Rorty's Review "...reading books like Israel's [The Modern Enlightenment"] helps us remember that those who grow passionate on one or the other side of arcane and seemingly pointless disputes are struggling with the question of what self-image it would be best for human beings to have. So it is with the dispute about truth that has been going on among the philosophy professors ever since the days of Nietzsche and James. That dispute boils down to the question of whether, in our pursuit of truth, we must answer only to our fellow human beings, or also to something non-human, such as the Way Things Really Are In Themselves.