To have and to eat cake: The biscriptive role of game-theoretic explanations of human choice behavior
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (2):159-160 (2003)
Game-theoretic explanations of behavior need supplementation to be descriptive; behavior has multiple causes, only some governed by traditional rationality. An evolutionarily informed theory of action countenances overlapping causal domains: neurobiological, psychological, and rational. Colman's discussion is insufficient because he neither evaluates learning models nor qualifies under what conditions his propositions hold. Still, inability to incorporate emotions in axiomatic models highlights the need for a comprehensive theory of functional rationality.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Distinctive Human Social Motivations in a Game-Theoretic Framework.Don Ross - 2005 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (5):715-716.
Origins of the Game Theory of Law and the Limits of Harmony in Plato's Laws.Arthur J. Jacobson - manuscript
The Roles of Stories in Applying Game Theory.Till Grüne‐Yanoff & Paul Schweinzer - 2008 - Journal of Economic Methodology 15 (2):131-146.
On the Narrow Epistemology of Game Theoretic Agents.Boudewijn de Bruin - 2009 - In Ondrej Majer, Ahti-Veikko Pietarinen & Tero Tulenheimo (eds.), Games: Unifying Logic, Language, and Philosophy. Springer.
Game Theoretic Explanations and the Evolution of Justice.Justin D'Arms, Robert Batterman & Krzyzstof Gorny - 1998 - Philosophy of Science 65 (1):76-102.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads26 ( #198,343 of 2,178,192 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #316,497 of 2,178,192 )
How can I increase my downloads?