Games machines play
Minds and Machines 12 (3):327-352 (2002)
| Abstract | Individual rationality, or doing what is best for oneself, is a standard model used to explain and predict human behavior, and von Neumann–Morgenstern game theory is the classical mathematical formalization of this theory in multiple-agent settings. Individual rationality, however, is an inadequate model for the synthesis of artificial social systems where cooperation is essential, since it does not permit the accommodation of group interests other than as aggregations of individual interests. Satisficing game theory is based upon a well-defined notion of being good enough, and does accommodate group as well as individual interests through the use of conditional preference relationships, whereby a decision maker is able to adjust its preferences as a function of the preferences, and not just the options, of others. This new theory is offered as an alternative paradigm to construct artificial societies that are capable of complex behavior that goes beyond exclusive self interest. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | No categories specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,653 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesJoseph Henrich, Robert Boyd, Samuel Bowles, Colin Camerer, Ernst Fehr, Herbert Gintis, Richard McElreath, Michael Alvard, Abigail Barr, Jean Ensminger, Natalie Smith Henrich, Kim Hill, Francisco Gil-White, Michael Gurven, Frank W. Marlowe & John Q. Patton (2005). “Economic Man” in Cross-Cultural Perspective: Behavioral Experiments in 15 Small-Scale Societies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (6):795-815.
Andrew M. Colman & Michael Bacharach (1997). Payoff Dominance and the Stackelberg Heuristic. Theory and Decision 43 (1):1-19.
Lisa J. Carlson & Raymond Dacey (forthcoming). Social Norms and the Traditional Deterrence Game. Synthese.
Richard Schuster (2003). Why Not Go All the Way. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):173-174.
Boudewijn de Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Thomas Getty (2007). In Evolutionary Games, Enlightened Self-Interests Are Still Ultimately Self-Interests. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 30 (1):25-26.
Boudewijn De Bruin (2005). Game Theory in Philosophy. Topoi 24 (2):197-208.
Andrew M. Colman (2003). Beyond Rationality: Rigor Without Mortis in Game Theory. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):180-192.
Maarten C. W. Janssen (2001). Rationalizing Focal Points. Theory and Decision 50 (2):119-148.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads2 ( #232,265 of 548,984 )Recent downloads (6 months)0How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
