Suchergebnisse

SINCE World War II and particularly in the last decade game theory has acquired broad interest, attention, and application by behavioral scientists. Basically, game theory is an attempt to simulate mathematically a situation of decision-making so as to discover the most rational decision. Situations involving two or more "persons" (that is, sets of individuals, groups or environments with isomorphic interests and/or capabilities) can be simulated. Currently game theory is employed in both university and corporate research for studying problems in the areas of economics, sociology, political science, international relations, and militarydefense strategy.

Strategic reasoning must take place, explicitly or implicitly, within some framework, whether formal or otherwise. It is often assumed that game theory is the only formal framework for strategic analysis. However, strategic reasoning is here distinguished from its particular bases. It is suggested that formal bases other than the game theoretic one are possible. A number of weaknesses & inadequacies of game theory, both as a direct & as an indirect basis for strategic reasoning, are pointed out. (With a game theoretic model of bargaining processes which in turn serves as a framework for strategic reasoning, game theory forms an indirect basis.) An alternative approach is suggested, involving the idea of a closed loop system; & it is argued that this may serve as a more fruitful basis for strategic reasoning. IPSA.

Ethical systems can be thought of as sets of constraints that, together with legal, biological, physical, & other constraints, affect decisions where the welfare of others, or the behavior of others, must be taken into account. Like any soc constraints, they can be examined for their effects on expectations & decisions. Game theory has already contributed to the study of collective choice & of certain kinds of 'fairness'; it may be helpful in clarifying those ethical constraints that affect people's expectations about each other & in working out the soc-behavioral implications of diff ethical systems. Examples are lying, breaking promises, coercive threats, & the possible soc inefficiency of selfishness or altruism. HA.