Presuppositions Of The Game Theory :: essays research papers

Presuppositions of The Game TheorySoloman believes that as the game theory gets more sophisticated, we tend to withdraw sight of the problem rather than solve it. He sees the problem as how toget people to think about contrast and about themselves in an Aristoteleanrather than a neo-Hobbesian (or even a Rawlsian) way, which the game theoreticalmodels simply presuppose.Soloman discusses seven presuppositions in the first section of his "Ethics &Excellence" book. They be rationality and prudence motivation and self-interest currency 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 assay will discuss two of these presuppositions and either agree ordisagree with Soloman and then give reasons as to why. The two presuppositionsthat will be discussed argon m one and only(a)y and measurement and the role of the rules.Money and MeasurementIn business, as in most games, we like to keep score. As one of Solomansbusinessman friends told him "in business you always know how well you are doing.You just have to put your hand in your pocket." People often think the moremoney one has, the happier they are. You often hear people say "if I only hadmore money, I would be happy." Frequently the perceived level of success iscompared to the size of ones situate 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 disport 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 definiteunit 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 inwardness and not an end."Soloman agrees w ith 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 areadily measurable utility, a readily comparable measure, and apparently clearbasis for comparison." But even some of these unrefined theorists recognizethat fitted 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 every end a monetary value, however,