Color blind

26.11.8
1237pm




have you ever thought about something, and then thought about it more, and then more yet?

There was this game we played during one part of the school... it was a pretty simple game composed of four teams. Your team chose one of two colors, red or green. And the dynamics of the game were this: If everyone chose green, everyone got a point. If everyone chose red, everyone lost a point. But here is where it got tricky... if three teams chose red, and one team chose green, the three teams would gain three points, and the one team would lose three. And if it was two and two, the two RED would gain two points, and the two green would lose two. (table below; +g and +r are the points that teams that chose g or r respectively earn)

1234 +g|+r
==========
gggg +1|+0
rrrr +0|-1
rrrg -3|+3
rrgg -2|+2

now. From the start I realised that red was the best choice, (I was appointed leader by my team), but a few on the team wanted to go green, so we did. Then after discussing and seeing how it worked against us, we decided to go red. As did everyone else. On the third round (or so) I realised the futility of everyone always choosing red, so I asked if the team leaders could conference. On the next round, we were granted a conference. During the conference, we made a pact to all choose green. But when we went back to our groups we found that one of the four did not stick to the pact. Which brought up a case that is not listed above. One red, three greens, which meant no one gained or lost points (at the very beginning of the game, the session leader quickly and non-chalantly mentioned that "there is one case that is not listed, and thats because it's worth zero for both".) For the next round we were not granted a conference, so my group went with green again, sticking to our word and hoping others would stand strong.

But we ended up with -3 again, and since this was a bonus round where all points were multiplied (i think by 10 or something) we lost all our points and went negative, and everyone else ended up going positive.



Then we had a discussion.

And basically the discussion focused on ethics and cooperation. And our group was lauded by the session leader for both, and held as an example of what Christian ministries should be like... trying for the common good, coordinating with other groups instead of competing, etc. (my group knew we couldn't win by coordinating, but we wanted everyone to benefit instead of only a few benefit, and a few lose)

But as I reflected on it, I realised that we didn't do the right thing once our team understood the game.

I feel like we should have always chosen green.


First, green is the optomistic color, because by choosing green, you can't hurt anyone else, and you're hoping for cooperation.

Second, green is the self sacrificial color, by choosing green, points are always awarded to someone, and if it's not awarded to everyone, then at least others benefited more than we lost.

Just now I was reminded of this analysis of mine, by a book I'm reading called "Sayings from the Desert Fathers" by Nouwen and Nomura. In the book is this saying:




"An old man said: I never wanted work that was useful to me but loss to my brother. For I have this expectation, that what helps my brother is fruitful for me."

And that's the eloquent and elegant way of saying what I had come to realise. Why should I ever gain from hurting others? Do we not as Christians realise that by hurting another, we are hurting ourselves? Because all are part of Christ? And not only are we hurting ourselves, but are we not hurting our greatest loved one? Jesus, Himself?
116pm