3 ms·

>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 agent

>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 ago
  It can be used to offer an explanation for those things, there are other frameworks that can as well
- 3pt14159 5y ago
  Not 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.
  - mLuby 5y ago
    Those are all perfectly rational actions if you use a sufficiently nuanced utility function. It shouldn't surprise that modeling humans as "maximizes dollars" is overly simple.
  - lisper 5y ago
    > 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. Yes it does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
- slibhb 5y ago
  > 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. Does game theory explain why other people do steal? Should we assume that thieves' circumstances are different enough that stealing is rational? Game theory is sometimes a useful way of thinking about human behavior but it's a stretch to say it "explains a lot of it". The various ways people come to value things and make decisions are opaque. It's begging the question to insist that these processes are explicable by game theory, especially when so much human behavior seems inexplicable.
  - lisper 5y ago
    > Does game theory explain why other people do steal? Yes. > Should we assume that thieves' circumstances are different enough that stealing is rational? You don't have to assume it. It's a fact. There's a reason that thieves come mainly from a certain socioeconomic group. > it's a stretch to say it "explains a lot of it". No, it is not a stretch at all. If you think it is, then you don't understand game theory. You should read this book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
    - slibhb 5y ago
      You said "a lot of human behavior is explained by game theory". Why can't we say that all human behavior is explained by game theory? How do we differentiate between an instance of behavior that is explained by game theory and one that isn't? It's useful and interesting to say "here's a theory that predicts ways in which people actually behave". It's begging the question to claim the theory actually explains human behavior, which remains opaque.
      - lisper 5y ago
        > Why can't we say that all human behavior is explained by game theory? We can. But game theory turns on the parameters of the payoff matrix, and those are "hidden variables" that are hard to measure. But they are constrained by ESS requirements, which is the thing that makes game-theory non-vacuous. It's analogous to saying that weather is explained by fluid dynamics.

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 ago
It can be used to offer an explanation for those things, there are other frameworks that can as well
3pt14159 5y ago
Not 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.
- mLuby 5y ago
  Those are all perfectly rational actions if you use a sufficiently nuanced utility function. It shouldn't surprise that modeling humans as "maximizes dollars" is overly simple.
- lisper 5y ago
  > 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. Yes it does: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
slibhb 5y ago
> 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. Does game theory explain why other people do steal? Should we assume that thieves' circumstances are different enough that stealing is rational? Game theory is sometimes a useful way of thinking about human behavior but it's a stretch to say it "explains a lot of it". The various ways people come to value things and make decisions are opaque. It's begging the question to insist that these processes are explicable by game theory, especially when so much human behavior seems inexplicable.
- lisper 5y ago
  > Does game theory explain why other people do steal? Yes. > Should we assume that thieves' circumstances are different enough that stealing is rational? You don't have to assume it. It's a fact. There's a reason that thieves come mainly from a certain socioeconomic group. > it's a stretch to say it "explains a lot of it". No, it is not a stretch at all. If you think it is, then you don't understand game theory. You should read this book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation
  - slibhb 5y ago
    You said "a lot of human behavior is explained by game theory". Why can't we say that all human behavior is explained by game theory? How do we differentiate between an instance of behavior that is explained by game theory and one that isn't? It's useful and interesting to say "here's a theory that predicts ways in which people actually behave". It's begging the question to claim the theory actually explains human behavior, which remains opaque.
    - lisper 5y ago
      > Why can't we say that all human behavior is explained by game theory? We can. But game theory turns on the parameters of the payoff matrix, and those are "hidden variables" that are hard to measure. But they are constrained by ESS requirements, which is the thing that makes game-theory non-vacuous. It's analogous to saying that weather is explained by fluid dynamics.