Presuppositions Of The Game Theory :: essays research papers

Presuppositions of The Game TheorySoloman believes that as the game theory gets more sophisticated, we tend tolose sight of the chore quite a than solve it. He sees the problem as how toget the great unwashed to think about business and about themselves in an Aristotelianrather than a neo-Hobbesian (or even a Rawlsian) behavior, which the game theoreticalmodels simply presuppose.Soloman discusses sevener presuppositions in the first section of his "Ethics &Excellence" book. They ar rationality and prudence motivation and self-interest m acey 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 essay 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 atomic number 18 property and measurement and the role of the rules.Money and Measurem entIn 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 get to to put your hand in your pocket." People a good deal think the moremoney one has, the happier they are. You often hear great deal say "if I only hadmore money, I would be happy." a great deal the perceived level of success iscompared to the size of ones bank account, the location of their stomach 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 feature 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 means and not an end."Soloman agrees with these statements but to further reject this presupposition,he goes on to discuss another example involving money.Social theorists, in general, "like to shed about money, because money is a right away measurable utility, a readily comparable measure, and apparently clearbasis for comparison." But even around of these unrefined theorists recognizethat equal amounts of money do not have equal significance for different people,therefore money is not an inviolate 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 take over every end a monetary value, however,