Is life really a game? Not if your emotions have a say!

Image by AndyWilson via Flickr

One of my fav reads is "The Frontal Cortex". Today's post is by Johan Lehrer. He is a contributing editor at Wired. He's also written for The New Yorker, Seed, Nature, and the New York Times and is a contributor to Radiolab. He's the author of Proust Was A Neuroscientist. His new book is How We Decide. He takes a look at our common assumption that life is a "game" or more specifically the application of "game theory." Many marketers and business folks use this metaphor to describe themselves and the fields they are in. But is it a true understanding about competition and performance? Yes and No says Lehrer. Games have rules and rules are rational. Our emotions over rule the rules causing a strict application of games to work and life to be inadequate. Read on...

clipped from thirstyfishinfo.amplify.com One of the lingering questions in decision science is the extent to which game theory - an abstract theory about how people can maximize their outcomes in simple interactions - is actually valid. It's a lovely idea, but does it actually describe human nature? As usual, the answer depends. With few exceptions, lab tests of game theory find that real human beings sharply deviate from the predictions of game theory. We don't maximize gain, often because of misperceptions about risk. But people have actually performed better in the field. Wouldn't natural selection want to endow us with a mind capable of maximizing competitive outcomes? One possibility is that failing at game theory is the price we pay for having emotions. an inexplicable feeling - a judgment of risk we can't justify - interferes with the rational calculation emotions might lead us to do many silly and stupid thing also amazingly effective tools when it comes to quickly evaluating the world Amplify'd fromscienceblogs.com

Related articles by Zemanta

• HOW WE DECIDE: mind-blowing neuroscience of decision-making (boingboing.net)