82,891
edits
Finite and Infinite Games: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|book review| | {{a|book review| | ||
[[File:Infinite finite game.png|450px|frameless|center]]}}{{br|Finite and Infinite Games: A Vision of Life as Play and Possibility}} | [[File:Infinite finite game.png|450px|frameless|center]]}}{{author|James P. Carse}}: {{br|Finite and Infinite Games: A Vision of Life as Play and Possibility}} (1986) | ||
There is so much in this book. Ostensibly, it is an obscure piece of cod philosophy from a religious studies professor in the mid nineteen-eighties. It might well have silted into the geological record as nothing more than that, but it is having a fertile third age: it has been picked up by [[Life coach|life-coach]] to the [[LinkedIn]] generation, {{author|Simon Sinek}}, and when minds as luminous as {{author|Stewart Brand}}’s speak reverently of it, it may have life above the daisies for a little while yet. Hope so. | There is so much in this book. Ostensibly, it is an obscure piece of cod philosophy from a religious studies professor in the mid nineteen-eighties. It might well have silted into the geological record as nothing more than that, but it is having a fertile third age: it has been picked up by [[Life coach|life-coach]] to the [[LinkedIn]] generation, {{author|Simon Sinek}}, and when minds as luminous as {{author|Stewart Brand}}’s speak reverently of it, it may have life above the daisies for a little while yet. Hope so. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Finite games have fixed rules, fixed boundaries in time and space and an agreed objective — usually to beat the other players. Infinite games have no fixed rules, no fixed boundaries, no fixed teams, and players are free to change the rules if that will help play to continue. | Finite games have fixed rules, fixed boundaries in time and space and an agreed objective — usually to beat the other players. Infinite games have no fixed rules, no fixed boundaries, no fixed teams, and players are free to change the rules if that will help play to continue. | ||
It is important, in life, not to confuse the two. The thrust of Sinek’s book is to insist that much of modern life does: that when we carry over [[metaphor]]<nowiki/>s from sport and war — the quintessential finite games — and apply them to business and politics we make a profound error: when we take on infinite players in what we take to be a finite game, we bog ourselves down in intractable quagmires: | It is important, in life, not to confuse the two. The thrust of Sinek’s book is to insist that much of modern life does: that when we carry over [[metaphor]]<nowiki/>s from sport and war — the quintessential finite games — and apply them to business and politics we make a profound error: when we take on infinite players in what we take to be a finite game, we bog ourselves down in intractable quagmires: Vladimir Putin, take note. This observation is appealing, and intuitively right, but there is much more to Carse’s original thesis than that. | ||
Carse, who died last year, is wilfully aphoristic in his literary style, and this is off-putting.<ref>Notably, Carse’s speaking style is much ''less'' cryptic and talks he gavve about the infinite game concept are worth checking out. See for example his talk to the Long Now Foundation: [https://longnow.org/seminars/02005/jan/14/religious-war-in-light-of-the-infinite-game/ Religious Wars in Light of the Infinite Game].</ref> He often says things like: | Carse, who died last year, is wilfully aphoristic in his literary style, and this is off-putting.<ref>Notably, Carse’s speaking style is much ''less'' cryptic and talks he gavve about the infinite game concept are worth checking out. See for example his talk to the Long Now Foundation: [https://longnow.org/seminars/02005/jan/14/religious-war-in-light-of-the-infinite-game/ Religious Wars in Light of the Infinite Game].</ref> He often says things like: | ||
| Line 72: | Line 72: | ||
{{Quote| | {{Quote| | ||
You know, man, when I was a young man in high school<br> | You know, man, when I was a young man in high school<br> | ||
You believe it or not, I wanted to play football for the coach | You believe it or not, I wanted to play football for the coach <br> | ||
And all those older guys<br> | And all those older guys<br> | ||
They said that he was mean and cruel, but you know<br> | They said that he was mean and cruel, but you know<br> | ||
| Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
Finite games tend to favour a top-down game management, with a coach and a captain. Infinite games are bottom up: every player must constantly assess her immediate environment and work out what to do based on the information she currently has. | Finite games tend to favour a top-down game management, with a coach and a captain. Infinite games are bottom up: every player must constantly assess her immediate environment and work out what to do based on the information she currently has. | ||
Where [[form]] dominates, we should concentrate our resources at the centre, where we formulate rules, work out [[algorithm]]s and devise playbooks, since if we get this right, success is a matter of execution, and failure comes from failure to follow the form. This has a few implications. Firstly, it means the brilliant minds belong to those at the top of the organisation: they do the most inspired thinking. Secondly, there is no more sacred quest than the creation of excellent process. Our most talented personnel are those who can write and maintain formal rules. Thirdly, those at the edges of the organisation whose job is not to formulate policy but to follow it — those who must put the leadership’s plans and algorithms into practice must not think: they must, so far as possible: quickly, flawlessly, cheaply. If you are in a finite game environment, the ''last'' thing you want them to do is make things up as they go along, as that will upset the plan. ''They must act like machines''. | Where [[form]] dominates, we should concentrate our resources at the centre, where we formulate rules, work out [[algorithm]]s and devise playbooks, since if we get this right, success is a matter of execution, and failure comes from failure to follow the form. This has a few implications. Firstly, it means the brilliant minds belong to those at the top of the organisation: they do the most inspired thinking. Secondly, there is no more sacred quest than the creation of excellent process. Our most talented personnel are those who can write and maintain formal rules. Thirdly, those at the edges of the organisation whose job is not to formulate policy but to follow it — those who must put the leadership’s plans and algorithms into practice must not think: they must, so far as possible: quickly, flawlessly, cheaply. If you are in a finite game environment, the ''last'' thing you want them to do is make things up as they go along, as that will upset the plan. ''They must act like machines''. The top-down model: God’s eye; the [[self-perpetuating autocracy]]. | ||
If we are in a wicked environment | If we are in a [[wicked environment]] cheap, quick, accurate machines are no use, and the infrastructure you have that overlays them, making sure they are working reliably, may make get in the way. Here, personnel at the edge of the organisation, who must engage and interact with the complex adaptive system must ''not'' act like machines. They must be experienced, expert, and empowered — ''trusted'' to deal with unfolding situations as they perceive them. The ongoing prosperity of the organisation is an [[emergent]] property of the behaviour of these subject matter experts. This is quite the opposite model: here the greatest value is provided at the edges of the organisation. The bottom-up model: ''laissez-faire''; [[invisible hand]]; evolutionary. | ||
=== As [[Single-round prisoner’s dilemma|single-round]] and [[Iterated prisoner’s dilemma|iterated prisoner’s dilemmas]] === | === As [[Single-round prisoner’s dilemma|single-round]] and [[Iterated prisoner’s dilemma|iterated prisoner’s dilemmas]] === | ||