The Philosopher Room

Hello, nice to meet you. I am a computer scientist at ImbeciLabs who specializes in simulation. I take pride in my job, enough so that I fancy a big promotion in my company. I conversed with my boss about the possibility. He says that if I can prove to him that I am smarter than him, I will get a promotion.

My boss is not the smartest person out there, and definitely not the smartest at our company. I believe he has created this friendly wager because he wants to ensure I deserve the promotion. I am certain I can beat him. I already have a plan. This wager may carry some risk because if I fail to prove I am smarter, I will be humiliated, and I will likely be deemed arrogant to even think of such an undeserving proposition. I don’t have to worry about any possible consequences, for I am sure I can prove it.

For this daunting task, I have created a simulation on a quantum computer. I am finalizing its preparations now, improving my algorithms and adjusting variables, pushing buttons and pulling levers. While I am doing this, let me explain the simulation. A room of about twenty philosophers will exist in this experimental space. Listen closely, for this is important. Every philosopher in this room is equally rational and perfectly rational. They all can use logic and reason perfectly, and they can all use it as perfectly as each other. Next, I have set a few conditions. First, all philosophers do not know that all other philosophers are as rational as themselves. Second, all philosophers’ goal is to find out who in the room is the most rational. Once they find out, they must communicate it to each other, they have no other option. Third, all philosophers do not want to talk over each other, for that would be an irrational decision. If they talk at the same time, they would be interrupting each other, and then they cannot listen to what the other is saying because they are busy saying their own things. You can see how the second condition mirrors the gamble with my boss. As for the third condition, that will become important later.

My preparations are complete. The simulation will be constructed very shortly. I will be viewing it from the perspective of one philosopher. Let us name him Aris. He will be among the twenty philosophers in this room, and he will be the one to experience this experiment for us. The next few paragraphs will be in the perspective of Aris, starting now.

I awaken in my world as a man. Feeling my face, I find I have a thick beard; feeling my body, I find I am wearing a white toga. I survey the world I am in. It is a room about fifteen by fifteen metres wide. The walls are made of dark mahogany wood with grooves and patterns in some parts to give variety to the plainness. The furniture of the room is also dark mahogany. There are small, round tables with delicate sky-blue vases holding roses and elaborate lamps, next to the numerous one-person sofas with burgundy cushions, surrounded by bookshelves embedded in the walls with an abundance of knowledgable books. There is a cozy fireplace at one end of the room, a fire currently flickering in its chamber, providing the room with comfortable heat. On the shelf above it are two griffins at each end looking forward but slightly inwards, their eyes watching the room with cold, calculating stares. On the ceiling, there are regal yet modest chandeliers that give the room sufficient light for conversation, and on the floor, there are expensive and well-crafted carpets with interestingly intricate designs over the dark mahogany planks. Lastly, there are some paintings on the walls depicting various ages of history.

There are other people in the room with me, men and women who have arrived into existence at the same time. There are about twenty of them, all wearing togas like me and standing around spots in the room looking fairly confused yet calm as if the sudden existence of this room was an ordinary tranquil experience. When I look at them, I gain an understanding of our nature. We are philosophers. And, consequently, I instinctively have a goal. I must find out which out of all of us is the most rational thinker. Then I must tell them when I find out.

I have assessed my own abilities. I am a perfectly rational thinker, and my logic is practically instantaneous and flawless. I do not know the rational capabilities of my philosopher comrades here in this room, I suppose I must gauge them on my own. We are all looking around at each other, observing and scrutinizing. I lock eyes with some of them, of whom I magically know their names. I exchange glances with Pyth, who has a soulless emotion in his eyes. I attempt to look stoic as well, for the sake of my ego. I look at Patia, her eyes revealing decades of experience and wisdom, and we share a slight nod. I do similar things with many of the others. Fucius, Aquin, Cartes, Lato, Aspa, and so forth.

In order to deduce who is the most rational, I must test the other philosophers with some logic tests. Perhaps I will start with easy questions, such as what is the sum of two plus two, then advance to harder ones such as the Riemann hypothesis. But there is one problem. If I speak first, and someone speaks at the same time as me, this will be an irrational decision. I must wait patiently for my turn to communicate my own logic tests. At this moment, I still do not know how rational the other philosophers are.

A quiet moment passes. No one speaks. All philosophers take turns staring blankly at the others all across the room. Now, I must assume that all other philosophers have thought the exact same thing as me, and do not want to speak in order to avoid interrupting each other. I conclude that all of us in this room are equally rational, and since I know I am perfectly rational, all of us in this room are perfectly rational as well. This conclusion is drawn from the fact that we all acted the same way and stayed silent.

Now I know that all philosophers want to test each other with logic tests and that the fact that no one has started proves that all philosophers know that all other philosophers know all philosophers in this room are equally rational. Now, the logic tests are useless, for all philosophers have figured out who is the most rational. We are all equal. That first part of our goal is complete. And, I know we have the same goal, for we are all equally rational. The next aim for all of us is to communicate this to each other, to tell the entire room that we are all equally and perfectly rational.

The question is who should be the first one to say this to the group? And there can only be one, for if two or more philosophers speak at the same time then we are not equally rational. Because we are all equally rational, all philosophers know this as well, so all philosophers do not want to take the risk of speaking first. However, we will wait in eternity if one does not speak first. That is irrational, as humans cannot wait an eternity, we would die before completing our goal of communicating to each other on who is the most rational. Therefore, if this happened, we would not be perfectly rational.

And so, what will happen? There are three scenarios to grant us an outcome. Scenario one. One or more of us speak first before the rest. If this happens, then that one or more of the group is more rational than all the others, for they were the ones who decided not to wait an eternity, which means we are all not equally rational. This scenario would only happen if we are not all equally rational. Scenario two. We all speak at the same time. If this happens, then this proves we are irrational, for speaking at the same time and interrupting each other so that we cannot listen to each other is something we do not want to do. This scenario would only happen if we are not all perfectly rational.

Whoever speaks first is the smartest in the group. Whoever speaks must say they are the smartest in the group. We have arrived at a stalemate. I have deducted all this in a mere fraction of a second, thanks to the power of my perfect rationale, meaning not even a moment after my conception in this strange room has passed before I arrived at this conclusion.

Speaking of my conception in this strange room, is it not odd to have been birthed as a man with other people in a room-universe with a clear instinctual goal in his mind to find out who is the smartest in the room? I am doing some advanced thinking right now. Ah, yes. I believe I am in a simulation, and my simulator probably knows I have figured it out by now, and he or she is about to cease--

This is the narrator. The computer scientist at ImbeciLabs. I have turned off the simulation out of fear for its dwellers becoming too enlightened. Perhaps I have made them too rational. I will not take that dangerous risk of men outsmarting their superiors.

With that, I believe I have the proof I need. I know what I need to do. I invite my boss for a coffee break in the break room. He accepts.

We enter the room. Without a second to waste, I speak first: “I am smarter than you.” 

He did not say anything during the time I said those words. Scenario one. I have won.

My boss says, “What?”

I am fired the next day.

###