Final answer:
When faced with decisions where the worst outcomes are equal, one should choose the alternative with the better second worst outcome, guided by Utilitarian principles of maximizing happiness or interest satisfaction for the greatest number of people.
Step-by-step explanation:
If the worst possible outcomes are equal, one should choose the alternative such that the second worst outcome is as good as possible. This principle is closely associated with decision-making strategies in situations of uncertainty and is informed by philosophies such as Utilitarianism, which advocates for actions that produce the greatest happiness or satisfy the greatest number of people's interests. In the example of Becky and Sarah, constructing a prisoner's dilemma table might help in assessing the best and worst outcomes for both parties involved.
In cases where optimal outcomes are unlikely—due to the reasoning or the nature of the decision-making process of the individuals involved—we often witness suboptimal choices being made. This could be due to lack of trust, miscommunication, or strategic reasoning that prioritizes individual rather than collective benefit. Yet, a Utilitarian approach would suggest choosing the option that maximizes overall happiness or interest satisfaction.
For instance, if there are multiple options to consider, a Utilitarian must choose the one that makes the highest percentage of people happy among those options, which isn't always the majority (>50%) but could be the greatest number possible.