Author Robert Wright explains "non-zero-sumness," a game-theory term describing how players with linked fortunes tend to cooperate for mutual benefit. This dynamic has guided our biological and cultural evolution, he says -- but our unwillingness to understand one another, as in the clash between the Muslim world and the West, will lead to all of us losing the "game." Once we recognize that life is a non-zero-sum game, in which we all must cooperate to succeed, it will force us to see that moral progress -- a move toward empathy -- is our only hope.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Moving on from simple zero-sum games, there are a bunch of directions in which
we can go. So far, the games we've looked at are very restrictive. Beyond the
zero-sum property, they're built on a set of fundamental properties which ultimately
reduce to the idea that no player ever has an…
Science & Theology News has an article on "evolutionism" that is replete with historical errors and other misdemeanors. But it indicates some nuances of the evolutionary biological debates are starting to have some impact.
The author, Gennaro Auletta, is a philosophy professor at the Pontifical…
In game theory, perhaps the most important category of simple games is
something called zero sum games. It's also one of those mathematical
things that are widely abused by the clueless - you constantly hear
references to the term "zero-sum game" in all sorts of contexts, and they're
almost always…
Years ago, when the Trophy Wife™ was a psychology grad student, she participated in research on what babies think. It was interesting stuff because it was methodologically tricky — they can't talk, they barely respond in comprehensible way to the world, but as it turns out you can get surprisingly…
The blurb misses the best thing about non-zero sum games - that people will cooperate under then even in the absence of altruism or empathy, since it is in their own interest to do so. Adam Smith said it best:
Thus, even if appeals to decency or justice fall to make the case for peace, the appeal to self-interest persists - theoretically, there is always a negotiated outcome that's better than warfare for both parties.