When I first read the book, my
first thought was “What on earth is game theory?” I then went and asked google
for some answers. According to the site, it is a situation where in the outcome
of one’s choice of action depends on the actions of other participants. He
explained this by using the concept of the Tragedy of the Commons and applying
it to the communal use of teaspoons in the office.
According to him, the mindset of
each person would be that getting one teaspoon from the communal kitchen would
not have a great effect to everyone else since a lot of teaspoons are still
left while it would be more practical and advantageous on his part. While such
is the case, if everyone has the same thinking, then the number of teaspoons
left in the communal kitchen would be significantly and noticeably reduced.
On this part of the book, I was
beginning to question the significance of this so called game theory in daily
life and why I should even care about it. Because really, what’s the big deal
about the disappearance of teaspoons? Fisher enlightened me by saying that
although the matter of the teaspoons may seem like a small matter, replacing
teaspoon with any other resource or basic human necessity such as land or water
may change once perspective regarding the matter at hand. This thought is best
represented by the lines from a 70’s protest song saying
“Everybody’s crying peace on earth,
just as soon as we win this war.”
The first chapter of the book talks
about the Prisoner’s Dilemma and Nash’s equilibrium. The dilemma referred to
here is that which illustrates a
conflict between individual and group rationality. A group whose members
are primarily concerned with their self-interests would end up in a situation
far worse than a group who rationally pursues the interest of the group. The
nash equilibrium is a social balance in which both sides are trapped in a
set-up and cannot change their decision independently, lest they will not be
able to get out of the logical trap. The similarity between the two concepts is
that the only way to resolve the situation would be to coordinate a certain
strategy with both sides and to stick to it.
The I Cut and You Choose theory in the 2nd chapter
appeals to our sense of fairness and is a strategy which entails I to divide a
resource in a way into two portions where he minimaxes or to minimizes his maximum possible loss, while the you
chooses which portion to take. This theory is considered fairplay since
although the resource isn’t divided equally, the person choosing which portion
to take uses his own freewill in the choosing.
The third chapter of the book recognizes the seven deadly dilemmas
which we face in order to evade cooperation. The first is the Prisoner’s
dilemma which was already discussed in the first chapter as well as the Tragedy
of the Commons. The third is the free-rider which as its name entails, refers
to not cooperating with a group effort. In my opinion, this concept is one in
which most of us are guilty of especially in instances where we do not help in
cleaning a mess we created, benefitting from the work of others without due
contribution and even in blocking the view of others during a concert or play
just so we could gain advantage and have better view.
The fourth concept is
called the Chicken (LOL). The name chicken must be referring to chickening out.
In refusing to lose in a competition of all sorts, we are prone to not make the
first move or back down no matter how ridiculous it may seem or the amount of
danger we put ourselves in just so we could win.
The fifth concept of social awkwardness in response to going
against cooperation is the Volunteer’s dilemma. This entails group situations
in which one is forced to make the force move, being the one that sacrifices in
order for the others to gain because all of the group would lose if nobody
sacrifices. In my opinion, this concept is one which requires selflessness
really (no matter how forced such selflessness is HAHAHA). Examples of this
situation is that of one having to die and jump off an overloaded life boat
upon the sinking of a ship -> or Jack giving the debris of a door to Rose
due to pure love and choosing to die in coldness of the ocean and Stefan (SCREW ELENA) goes with Klaus and
becomes the ripper huhu just so Damon’s life could be saved from Tyler’s
werewolf bite </3. Other examples I could think of for this concept is being
the one to get out of an overloaded elevator just so everyone else could get on
their way while you suffer and wait for the next one and being the one in the group
to be left in the lab and starve just so someone could look out for the
chemicals cooking while the others get to enjoy lunch first.
The sixth dilemma is called The Battle of the Sexes. This dilemma for me is just plain
ridiculous. I mean, really, it was discovered just because of a man wanting to
watch a baseball game while his wife wanted to go watch movies, while neither would
back down and both wanted each other’s company. Ridiculous. I would also have
to say that the name is misleading since the dilemma being referred to has
nothing to do with opposite sexes. Hahaha seriously.
The last dilemma is “Stag Hunt”. According to Jean Jacques
Rousseau (whoo philosophy here), this dilemma is about the frustration to
balance out between social cooperation and individual freedom. True freedom can
be attained by sacrificing some of our own freedom. I could attribute this to heroes
who died in order to preserve of promote national freedom from slavery, oppression
and the like. Nationalism is rare nowadays. The best example for this would
have to be that of the heroism by Nelson Mandela, making it his life’s work to
free Africans from oppression and to make sure that skin color is not the basis
for respect.
"We enter into a covenant that we shall build a society in which all South
Africans, both black and white, will be able to walk tall, without and fear in
their hearts, assured of their inalienable right to human dignity – a rainbow
nation at peace with itself and the world."
The
rest of the book contains other concepts still of facing social awkwardness all
in trying to get past cooperation. Therefore, I would have to summarize and
conclude everything I have learnt in this book by saying cooperation is key. In
all circumstances, we all would like to win. However, not every situation requires
outbidding each other in order to get our desire goals. If striving hard to be
the best is our motto in life, then so be it, but we should push it past our
minds that there can be more than one winner in life. Therefore, if we help
build each other to obtain all of our goals by communicating and coordinating,
trusting each other’s company and getting past the selfishness to be the only
one that succeeds, then the situation would be a win-win for everyone involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment