From: "Rosser Jr, John Barkley" <rosserjb-AT-jmu.edu>
Subject: Re: M-I: Application to Reality?
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 10:40:14 -0500 ()


Shane,
     1)  Von Neumann never got a Nobel Prize.
     2)  Cournot had a Nash equilibrium solution in 1836, a 
little ahead of Sweezy.
Barkley Rosser
On Mon, 17 Mar 1997 20:41:23 -0500 (EST) Shane Mage 
<shmage-AT-pipeline.com> wrote:


> Barkley Rosser writes:
> 
> >     Sorry, Shane, you are simply wrong.  The "prisoners"
> >could be pure revolutionaries resisting a fascistic
> >dictatorship.  They are "guilty" of trying to overthrow the
> >vicious regime.  Noting evil or "atomistic" here.
> 
> This, better than anything I could imagine, expresses how ludicrous this
> sort of thinking can become.  Revolutionaries in the torture chamber of a
> fascist  dictatorship plea-bargaining with their interrogators?
> 
> >The story is a metaphor for a more general problem that occurs
> >in many situations from wars to the workplace to marriages.
> 
> "Game Theory" pretends to analytical rigor, but its based on a *metaphor*???
> 
> >     BTW, Carrol Cox is correct that in its pure form the
> >model involves a lack of communication.  But this can be
> >varied and in itself is instructive.  Cooperation is more
> >likely to occur when there is more communication, although
> >not necessarily if the communication is like some on this
> >list, :-).
> >     A further weird wiggle is that the usual presentation
> >of the PD in intro econ textbooks is in conjunction with
> >the theory of cartels and as an example of why they tend to
> >be unstable and break down.  "Confessing" is "cheating on
> >the cartel."  Ironically in this case most of us are
> >cheering for the cheater to break up the cartel whereas in
> >almost every other example of the PD we are cheering for
> >cooperation, so to speak.
> 
> Take the Nobel Prize from that plagiarist Von Neumann!  Paul Sweezy
> invented game theory in 1938(?) with his discovery of "The Kinked Oligopoly
> Demand Curve."
> 
> Shane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> >On Fri, 14 Mar 1997 22:48:08 -0500 (EST) Shane Mage
> ><shmage-AT-pipeline.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Justin Schwartz wrote:
> >>
> >> >Doug suggests that the insights of game theory can be expressed in
> >> >English. He doesn't quite get the prisoner's dilemma right, which exposes
> >> >some of the pitfalls of trying to do this. The point with the PD, Doug, is
> >> >not a conflict between short range and long range interests, but purely
> >> >that between individual and collective interests, if you want to put it
> >> >that way. The force of the PD is that individual actors who act rationally
> >> >will in PD-like circumstances, end up with results that are less good for
> >> >them, indeed as individuals in terms of their own interest narrowly
> >> >conceived, than if they acted on a collective motivation.
> >>
> >> The problem, as I see it, centers in that phrase "PD-like circumstances."
> >> These circumstances are fourfold: (1) All prisoners are in fact guilty of
> >> the crime of which they are accused; (2) The crime was perpetrated by
> >> people whose motivation was primarily atomistic (ie., it had no wider
> >> purpose than the individual aggrandizement of people with no stronger
> >> social bond than that expressed by the phrase "honor among thieves."); (3)
> >> The prisoners have a rational basis for trusting the promises as well as
> >> the threats of their captors; and (4) The consequences of "snitching" are
> >> predictably those presented by the captors (ie., the offer of a reduced
> >> term can be calculated without considering the likely fate of a "snitch" in
> >> prison).  I would contend that nothing remotely resembling these conditions
> >> exists for people in the real world--even prisoners under total control of
> >> their jailers  will scarcely display this sort of  "rationality" until they
> >> have been psychologically conditioned by the sorts of torture preferred by
> >> the jailers in question to conceive of themselves as atomized, powerless,
> >> scum.  I wonder what might be the psychological roots for adopting such a
> >> model of human social behavior?
> >>
> >> >Louis objects that game theoretic explanations of the arms race, the cold
> >> >war, and various wars, etc. are not Marxist because if they focus on
> >> >nations as actors they ignore class. Well, Louis and I have an
> >> >unbridgeable divide about whether it matters whether explanations are
> >> >Marxist in some suitable sense and it's not worth rehashing that here. I
> >> >will say only, Duh? and so what? The issue is whether the explanations
> >> >are true.
> >>
> >> Of course it is, and they aren't.  Nations cannot be actors because they
> >> simply *do not exist* in the relevant sense.  In the philosophical
> >> terminology of Bokononism, nations are "gonfaloons," not "kerasses."  Or,
> >> if you will, they are not organic entities, they are contradictory arenas
> >> of social struggle.  The ruling classes use flags and other symbols to
> >> foster the fraud of their "solidarity" with the exploited, but no analysis
> >> of any international relationship can pretend to realism--or
> >> rationality--if it does not center on the perceived interests of the
> >> *rulers*.  Marxism can claim general historical validity precisely because
> >> it centers on class relationships as crucial determinants of human social
> >> behavior.
> >>
> >> >Maybe Louis thinks it's
> >> >not important to understand that it's actually rational in a very deep and
> >> >important sense to let others do the work and if we all do that the work
> >> >will not get done, but I think that's a major insight.
> >>
> >> What can be more *trivial* than the assertion that if all people conceived
> >> themselves as lacking any sort of social solidarity nothing would be done
> >> except by compulsion?  And what can be a falser picture of human nature
> >> than to place atomistic individualism "very deep" in the human psyche and
> >> social motivation (including the psychological gratification to be found in
> >> participating in a worthwhile social work-effort) nowhere in particular?
> >>
> >> >Louis characateristically misreads my application of this sort of analysis
> >> >to the breakup of the USSR into its constitutent republics as an account
> >> >of the economic collapse of the USSR. He knows and loathes my own analysis
> >> >of that collapse, which is...The collapse
> >> >of the USSR and in particular its dissolution is a classic illustration of
> >> >the PD: unity was the best outcome, but required cooperation; the
> >> >individually rational motivation of the leaders of the Republics
> >> >(basically to be big fish in small ponds) drove the postcommunist system
> >> >into disunity. Louis is unlikely himself to investigate this, but a main
> >> >attraction of rational choice theory is the explanatory power with regard
> >> >to a  wide range of real world phenomena.
> >>
> >> And now the actors are no longer "nations" but "individually rational
> >> leaders"!  As if the conflict of interest between local and central
> >> bureaucracies was not a crucial and ever worsening contradiction of the
> >> ruling class that came to power as a consequence of the Stalinist
> >> counter-revolution of 1929-1939!  As if  twenty years earlier the
> >> mathematician Andrei Amalrik had not predicted this "nationalist" breakup
> >> of the soi-disant Soviet Union!  That, despite his sincere hatred of
> >> stalinism, Justin can present the collapse of the stalinist system as
> >> merely a matter of ruling bureaucrats acting individualistically as
> >> power-seekers rather than in the collective interest of their fellow
> >> thieves, must be some sort of indictment of the use of Game Theory, with
> >> its methodological underpinning of determinate outcomes that can only be
> >> aspired to through total bureaucratic control, as a tool of social and
> >> historical analysis.
> >>
> >> Shane Mage
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>      --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> >
> >--
> >Rosser Jr, John Barkley
> >rosserjb-AT-jmu.edu
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
> 
> 
> 
> 
>      --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

-- 
Rosser Jr, John Barkley
rosserjb-AT-jmu.edu




     --- from list marxism-international-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---