"We can state the root cause of the Dwight-Phyllis dynamic as follows: the depth of any transaction is limited by the depth of the shallower party." There's so

"We can state the root cause of the Dwight-Phyllis dynamic as follows: the depth of any transaction is limited by the depth of the shallower party." There's some interesting analysis to the post - which seems as relevant to game theory as to developmental psychology, however... Its practical application / warning seems to me (as it resonates with my personal experience, too): Know when not to enter a game on terms that are stacked against you. cf: A jogger beside my car challenges me to see who can get to the office faster. When I accept he says, "well, we have to level the field: get out of your car," knowing that with us both on foot his regular training makes him the winner. i.e., know that there are some discussions where rational-analytic ability are irrelevant. Try talking rationally about politics/religion with a dedicated know-nothing. Or convincing a 4 year-old that he'll someday be interesting in engaging reproductive parts with another human being for the pleasure of it.