3 ms·
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 s
by 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 agoThose 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