A more benign interpretation, based on the collective-action principle, envisages the court as instrumental in attaining a superior welfare equilibrium. Individuals know fundamentally what is good for them and for society, but they are often hesitant to act accordingly, owing to fear, embarrassment, or, very often, the belief that their actions will not be worthwhile if others do not follow in their footsteps.
而另一个更温和的解读则基于集体行为原则，将法庭假设为一个为了实现更高层次福利均衡的工具。每个人在本质上都知道什么是对自身和社会有益的，但他们之所以不去动手实施那些有益行为，就是出于恐惧，尴尬或经常以为如果没人追随的话就是不值得。