Kavka's Toxin Puzzle.

[TheEmoSalesman]

Kavka's Toxin Puzzle is a thought experiment about the possibility of forming an intention to perform an act which, following from reason, is an action one would not actually perform. It was presented by moral and political philosopher Gregory S. Kavka in "The Toxin Puzzle" (1983), and grew out of his work in deterrence theory and mutual assured destruction.

Kavka's original version of the puzzle is the following:

An eccentric billionaire places before you a vial of toxin that, if you drink it, will make you painfully ill for a day, but will not threaten your life or have any lasting effects. The billionaire will pay you one million dollars tomorrow morning if, at midnight tonight, you intend to drink the toxin tomorrow afternoon. He emphasizes that you need not drink the toxin to receive the money; in fact, the money will already be in your bank account hours before the time for drinking it arrives, if you succeed. All you have to do is intend at midnight tonight to drink the stuff tomorrow afternoon. You are perfectly free to change your mind after receiving the money and not drink the toxin.

Herein lies the rub: Can you intend to drink the toxin if you know you don't have to?

I want to hear your thoughts about this. I'll post more later on after there's been some discussion. I'm getting this from an article, but I didn't post it all, but I will after I see what you think.

Remember, there's more to this problem than it seems.  

[Dameon the -V-]

You are copying my look >.>

Kavka's puzzle is more of a psych puzzle than anything. Would it be possible for a human to be reliable is basically what it is saying.

And yes, yes I would.  

[Mileena Chardonnay]

The question is, how wouldn't you? Odds are, you'd actually end up drinking it for the hell of it.  

[Bellabie]

Mobius Nightshade

The question is, how wouldn't you? Odds are, you'd actually end up drinking it for the hell of it.

I wouldn't...
Drinking toxin just for fun?
Uck.

Are you sure that's not "Kafka," friend?


I would, as to hold to the commitment. Replace the toxin with a task. If you were granted millions of dollars to try and do something, like engineering a new chemical structure...
I would do it, for a reputation in your field, and the trust of those around you is more valuable than the millions earned.

b  

[TheEmoSalesman]

Yes, but the problem with that scenario is that by completing the given task, it would be beneficial. The thing about the toxin puzzle is that the situation given questions man's ability to put themselves in situations where their own well-being is in question; even if you don't have to, you can say you would intend to, but then, knowing you didn't have to, you probably wouldn't. The only way to beat the paradox is to actually drink the toxin. Even though the benefactor tells you you don't have to drink it, in your eyes, you would have to, because you can't intend to do something you know you won't do. But by looking at it as a situation where you must drink the toxin, it becomes a simple choice; drink it and get a million dollars, or pass and go home with nothing.  

[Lady Rayya]

the problem is that since you now know you don't have to... you will NEVER actually intend to drink it. You may SAY you do, but actual intent will be altered based on the situation.

only a pathologically honest person would actually intend on drinking it... and a pathologically honest person would actually go on to drink it....  

[Bellabie]

I disagree.
Simply because I am not required to do something unpleasant, regardless of the worth in reward, does not mean that I will not do it.
b  

[Lady Rayya]

because you are pathologically honest biggrin

lurves to you, btw... I've missed talking to you.