Presuppositions Of The Game Theory :: essays research papers

Presuppositions of The Game TheorySoloman believes that as the patch theory gets more sophisticated, we tend tolose sight of the problem rather than solve it. He sees the problem as how toget people to trust or so business and about themselves in an Aristotelianrather than a neo-Hobbesian (or nevertheless a Rawlsian) way, which the game theoreticalmodels simply presuppose.Soloman plowes seven presuppositions in the first section of his "Ethics &Excellence" book. They argon understanding and prudence motivation and self-interest m cardinaly and measurement the anomaly of altruism good and goals theopen-ended playing field and the role of the rules. Soloman rejects eachpresupposition and gives his reasons why.This as swear will discuss two of these presuppositions and either agree ordiffer with Soloman and then give reasons as to why. The two presuppositionsthat will be discussed are money and measurement and the role of the rules.Money and MeasurementIn business, a s in most games, we like to aliveness score. As one of Solomansman of affairs friends told him "in business you always know how well you are doing.You retributive have to put your hand in your pocket." People often hold the moremoney one has, the happier they are. You often hear people say "if I only hadmore money, I would be happy." Frequently the perceive level of triumph iscompared to the size of ones bank account, the location of their house or theamount of cars in the driveway. People seem to perceive money as beinghappiness.Soloman says that keeping score, although it is not an essential feature ofgames, seems to be one of the most durable features of game theory. He thinksthat the best way to keep score is to have a dependable point system, a distinctunit of worth, which is money.Soloman rejects this presupposition by first stating that "money isnt the onlyor even primary social good", and "money is only a center and not an end."Soloman agrees with these statements but to further reject this presupposition,he goes on to discuss another example involving money.Social theorists, in general, "like to talk about money, because money is a readily measurable utility, a readily comparable to(predicate) measure, and apparently clearbasis for comparison." But even some of these crude theorists recognizethat pit amounts of money do not have equal significance for different people,therefore money is not an absolute readily measurable utility. Soloman statesthat various ends are hard to compare and so success and "maximum utility" maybe hard to measure. "If we were to assign either end a monetary value, however,