4 ms·
> Game theory, faithful to its name, treats every human context as a game—a self-contained situation in which your sly rival must lose for you to win, and in wh
by JackFr 5y ago
> Game theory, faithful to its name, treats every human context as a game—a self-contained situation in which your sly rival must lose for you to win, and in which the nature of these losses and wins can be always summed up in precise numbers.
That’s a complete mischaracterization. Game theory literally has zero to say about the human condition. It is a mathematical theory.
It reads to me as if the reviewer had a ‘hook’ for the review and was going to use it, whether he could find support for it or not.
- morelisp 5y agoIf it had nothing to say about the human condition it would be called something like "multi-party valuation theory" and not specifically designed to analyze "roulette to chess, baccarat to bridge".
- smitty1e 5y agoIn the context of a person who (for zero real research) sounds as though he intellectualized life perhaps to a fault, the game theory anecdote seems to fit.
- servytor 5y agoMy professor said that a good example of the Nash equilibrium is the double yellow line on the road. You have no incentive to go past it, just like the people driving at you in the other lane have no incentive to go into your lane. Game theory can explain a lot of human actions, alone or in groups.
- DebtDeflation 5y ago>Game theory literally has zero to say about the human condition. It is a mathematical theory. Correct. Economics is the study of the result of rational agents engaging in optimizing (in the mathematical sense) behavior. Game theory is an extension of that when there are strategic interactions between those agents (traditional micro assumes simple price-taking behavior). Source: undergraduate was in Economics.
- lisper 5y ago> Correct. No, not correct. Not even a little bit correct. Game theory explains a lot of human (and animal) behavior. It explains, for example, why I do not rob my neighbor's house when I know they are on vacation even though I could almost certainly get away with it and thereby achieve a short-term profit for myself. It explains why rich people who wring their hands over climate change continue to buy first-class airline tickets posh vacation destinations. It explains why Putin invaded Ukraine, and why the soldiers who are actually doing the dirty work continue to do that dirty work despite the fact that very few of them actually would have chosen to invade Ukraine. It explains why discussions on the internet often degrade into flame-fests, and why this happens more rapidly if people are allowed to post anonymously or pseudonymously.
- X6S1x6Okd1st 5y agoIt can be used to offer an explanation for those things, there are other frameworks that can as well
- 3pt14159 5y agoNot really. It explains only the optimal play of intelligent, clear headed, self-interested actors. It does not explain why someone would jump into a river to save a drowning child that they do not know even at the cost of their own life. There are many other examples like this. Game theory does not encapsulate values or morality. It's fine for someone with sufficient psychopathy or cowardice, but to say it explains even a small fraction of human behaviour goes too far. Bakers and butchers are not seeking to maximize their utility. Some people just want to grow flowers, go to Church, and be good neighbours.