An economics, investment, trading and policy blog with a focus on Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). We seek the truth, avoid the mainstream and are virulently anti-neoliberalism.
Very weak argument. I have heard such arguments from other pure mathematicians who really know nothing about the applications of their fields to life, and who have done zero empirical research on that impact, and who seem to take a perverse pride in the purity and non-applicability of what they do. But they are just wrong. Logic, like arithmetic, has immense practical application and the training in logic enables people to follow and evaluate complex chains of reasoning that they otherwise wouldn't.
Knowing your audience is also a game. What CAN be logically inferred from theoretically available evidence may or may not be what is actually inferred by given groups practicing learned habits.
Cats? Dogs? Humans? Different sub-cultures of humans? Ages? Backgrounds? Experiences? Personalities? Recent history & motivations?
The application of game theory is itself a game. No mystery there.
Just compare the answers from a starving vs satiated person participating in a food-acquisition game.
Or watch the behavior of a needy person vs an investor with no comparable "needs," only greeds.
If they're all citizens, then regulate to serve the needs of the needy as well as the greedy. They all participate, through sexual recombination, in producing tomorrow's citizenry.
Scalable game theory always comes round to recognizing all the players playing the game?
3 comments:
Very weak argument. I have heard such arguments from other pure mathematicians who really know nothing about the applications of their fields to life, and who have done zero empirical research on that impact, and who seem to take a perverse pride in the purity and non-applicability of what they do. But they are just wrong. Logic, like arithmetic, has immense practical application and the training in logic enables people to follow and evaluate complex chains of reasoning that they otherwise wouldn't.
Knowing your audience is also a game. What CAN be logically inferred from theoretically available evidence may or may not be what is actually inferred by given groups practicing learned habits.
Cats?
Dogs?
Humans?
Different sub-cultures of humans?
Ages? Backgrounds? Experiences? Personalities? Recent history & motivations?
The application of game theory is itself a game. No mystery there.
Just compare the answers from a starving vs satiated person participating in a food-acquisition game.
Or watch the behavior of a needy person vs an investor with no comparable "needs," only greeds.
If they're all citizens, then regulate to serve the needs of the needy as well as the greedy. They all participate, through sexual recombination, in producing tomorrow's citizenry.
Scalable game theory always comes round to recognizing all the players playing the game?
The best application of game theory is with games. Hehe... like modern video games.
Post a Comment