https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t A lesson in arbitrary choice en-us 2017-01-10 20:12:03 UTC 2017-02-01 02:46:14 UTC hello@padlet.com cadler01 https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150652173 There is a certain social experiment that I have recently taken part in. In this experiment, the group of people is set in the hypothetical predicament that they are on a deserted island with no one but each other. They then have to choose a leader, who will find out the secret rules of the island, and decide whether or not the others are safe based on choices they make. 
In our experiment, there were several rounds, and by the end of each round some people would be 'safe' and others 'in danger.' Those in danger were eliminated from the game due to non compliance with the rules, and those who followed the rules were safe. The catch? None of us but our chosen leader had any idea what the rules were. 
After the experiment was over (I made it through the first round, but was eliminated in the second and final round) we learned what the rules had been, and it was a bit of a shock for all of us to hear why we had been eliminated.]]> 2017-01-31 19:06:13 UTC https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150652173 cadler01 https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150654587 In the first round, the rules were a little easier for us to understand than in the second. No one was told the rules except the leader, but many caught on. We were all asked what we would bring with us to the hypothetical island for our survival. We later learned that there were only a few answers that would make us 'safe.' 
Surprisingly (or not, if you read the heading of this post), the rule was, not to bring a useful item to the island, but an item that, when spelled out, had a double consonant in its name. I caught on to this fact, and saved myself by bringing, "glass," to the island. Others were not so fortunate. Only six of ten made it to the second round.]]> 2017-01-31 19:11:59 UTC https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150654587 cadler01 https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150656783 In the second round, no one figured out the technique to avoid elimination. We were all asked to vote out one other person in the group, and explain why they would not be useful to us on this hypothetical island. Apparently there was room for only three of us. I'll admit I was the first to attempt to vote one out. My hypothetical survival instinct is strong. Still, it did me no good, as I was eliminated and sent to the danger zone anyways. I assumed at first that the leaders had decided to get rid of me due to my apparent lack of team spirit, and I was not too upset because of that. I will be the first to admit that I have a challenging personality, and I wouldn't hold it against someone to want to throw me to the wolves every so often. But, as mentioned before, the rules were more random than simple choice. 
After three were eliminated and three were sitting pretty on their island with the two leaders, we learned the true nature and rules of the game. Those who had been eliminated in the first round, and even some who made it to the second, were exposed to the truth of the double consonant. Those of the second round were informed that we were not eliminated due to personality, but rather fashion choice. 
Those of us who were wearing zip-up sweaters and hoodies were chosen to 'die.' Those free of zippers were also free of peril. ]]> 2017-01-31 19:16:54 UTC https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150656783 cadler01 https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150660020 I learned early on in the game that the rules were not all that met the eye. Still, I had believed in the second round, that explaining why I would be an asset to the leader would earn me a place in the Golden Trio. To learn that my attributes would not spare me from death due to apparel was shocking and disquieting. As a group (those who had been exiled to the danger spot were kindly brought back to life) we discussed the morality of this situation. To die because you prefer jackets to a pullover, or because you (rightly) believe that water would be more helpful on an island then kittens? Insane. We quickly discovered the parallel that this was supposed to draw our attention to. We found it equally ridiculous that those with blonde hair, blue eyes, and a Christian upbringing were spared the fury of the Nazi party. Or that pigment of skin decided which water fountain one drank at or whether one had to spend a lifetime of servitude. The injustice of it hit hard. How was I to know, on that day, that wearing my soft zipper jacket was a fatal mistake? More importantly; why did our hypothetical and, in extension, our real society follow these rules? No one left the experiment feeling as though they were given a fair trial. Not one aspect of intelligence or personality or character had been included in our judgements. It leaves us to reflect on one question. 
Why does society judge us worthy or unworthy to live on our own islands because of its arbitrary rules?]]> 2017-01-31 19:24:36 UTC https://padlet.com/cadler01/olaf8epq3f9t/wish/150660020