IMPLEXI MUNDI: International Arts and Sciences Complexity Worlds

Modelling peace, common sense behavior and/or cooperation
By: Roulette Smith on: Sun 29 of Nov, 2009 [21:28 UTC] (221 reads)

I want to represent the next stage of what I intended to present last year, which was mathematical and scientific observations about the economics of common sense, the economics of disorders of common sense and the economics of stupidity. My intention this year is to show why game theory and the Nash equilibrium fundamentally are unsuitable for studies of peace, common sense behavior and/or cooperation. I would show that the notion of competition in game theory and the Nash theorem are, I believe, irreconcilable when peace, cooperation and/or common sense require consensus and consilience involving large N and no “competition.” I would cite how competition in such situations is an anathema that leads to ”loopholing of laws” and “gaming the system,” not consonance.

This entry is not a formal entry, but from a message from Roulette on the intention for his presentation this year. His participation is pending his ability to make the trip. Photo is of Roulette and friend/student from the 2008 Conference.

(2629 bytes)

Of possible interest to Snowflake Forum participants is how ‘gaming the system’ often leads to different types of non-linear dynamics, pathology and chaos. I cite examples of political, cultural and developmental ‘gaming-the-system’ involving the situations in Northern Ireland (vs the Irish Republic), the Republican opposition in the 111th US Congress (2nd Session), the Catholic Church’s political posturing on abortion and same-sex marriage (especially in Washington, DC and in MA), the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (especially regarding settlement activities), and young kids vis-à-vis their parents. Although these examples deliberately are wide-ranging and provocative, a goal is to focus on underlying mathematics, statistical and biological issues surrounding qualities of ‘gaming the system’, and the intensity and frequency of ‘gaming the system’ activities and associated chaos.

Ultimately, my findings may explain why game theory, and particularly the Nash equilibrium theorem (Nash, 1950), have not been particularly effective or successful (i.e., practically-speaking) in mediation, peace studies, business and economics. A longer-term goal is to formulate mathematical and biological theories of cooperation, consensus and consilience that also characterize aspects of common sense (Smith, 2007; Smith, 2008; Smith, 2009). Such a theory should include a somewhat novel notion of using “logistic reasoning” (and GPS-like mental activities) to guide logic, reasoning, anticipation, look-ahead, feed-forward and feedback, and, fault and error analyses for both prescriptive and proscriptive purposes.

References
Nash, J. (1950). Equilibrium points in n-person games, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 36(1):48-49.
Smith, R. Wm. (2007). A Transpersonal Approach to Helping Unknowingly Needy and Worried Well Persons: An Example of In Situ Diagnoses and Follow-Up in the Study of Common Sense and Aberrant Common Sense in Post-World War II Germany, Karl Jaspers Forum Target Article 100 (December 15, 2007; available online at "kjf.ca/100-TASMI.pdf").
Smith, R. Wm. (2008). Common Sense – Its Development and Disorders, ExtraOrdinary Technology 6(2-Apr/May/Jun):49-64 (expanded version of this essay paper external link

article is available online at "teslatech.info/ttmagazine/v6n2/v6n2smith.pdf").
Smith, R. Wm. (2009). More on Common Sense – Its Development and Disorders, ExtraOrdinary Technology 7(1-Spring/Summer):49-64 (expanded version of this article is available online at "teslatech.info/ttmagazine/v6n2/v6n2smith.pdf").

Support ImplexiMundi