Q&A: The Money Suitcase Dilemma
The Money Suitcase Dilemma
Question
Hello Rabbi,
Today we were asked in a large group about the following dilemma:
You and another person are in a park, and suddenly a billionaire comes over and decides to do a good deed. He offers both of you a suitcase containing 10 million shekels.
The condition is this: you have to arrange the division of the reward between the two of you within one minute. If you do not agree on the amount, neither of you gets anything.
The stranger comes to you and says: “No matter what you choose, I’m telling him that I’m taking the entire amount except for 10,000 shekels, which I’ll leave for you.”
No matter what, he cannot be persuaded.
So the question is: would you take the amount, or would you choose the situation in which neither person gets anything?
I answered that I would choose the money, because I am not driven by feelings of revenge and I do not care about the other person’s happiness.
The others attacked me and said: if he took such a huge amount, then he is certainly a selfish person, and I do not want what is good for him. And besides, it would hurt my ego.
Is there a moral issue in this dilemma?
Would taking the money be an unethical action on my part, since I am cooperating with selfish behavior?
Answer
I do not see any moral issue here. Game theory says to take the money, of course assuming it is clear to you that the other person will carry out his policy. Otherwise, this is a game of chicken.
That is also assuming that your counterpart’s policy is immoral. But I am not even sure about that. The money does not belong to either of you, so if he has a technique for winning as much as possible, he is entitled to use it. This reminds me of my comment on the morality of the game Golden Balls; see column 197.