palou said:
I'm not qualified to go too far into the details - but game theory does anayze situations seperately for rational players (understanding everything immediately, no matter the complexity) and limited players (only capable of following a limited strategy.) Sadly, the first kind (which obviously doesn't exist, in practice) is usually much, much easier to deal with...
What's interesting about the whole thing is, the players don't need to understand the game. Just know the rules (morality), and after that, reliably follow their interests. Then, game theory would allow to optimize the rules in a way tha could benefit all. It's not a completed subject, by any means - but a very intersting approach to utilitarianism. |
"What's interesting about the whole thing is, the players don't need to understand the game. Just know the rules (morality), and after that, reliably follow their interests."
the problem here is how do they know the rules? or is the assumption being made that they just follow whatever they personally believe is moral?
