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 Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 104: | Line 104: | ||
And here we wonder a little about the commutability of infinite games into finite ones: sporting matches are like single round prisoner’s dilemmas: zero-sum in a way that recommends only outright domination. | And here we wonder a little about the commutability of infinite games into finite ones: sporting matches are like single round prisoner’s dilemmas: zero-sum in a way that recommends only outright domination. | ||
===Problem cases=== | |||
====The Christians, atheists and their [[interminable game]]s==== | |||
A particular type of argumentative youth — it may not shock you to find that the JC was one, once — will take delight in forming abstract and highly artificial positions from which to launch highly formalised denouncenents of the views of an anyone holding a contradictory abstract position while opponents to just the same thing back | |||
This used to happen in town squares and speakers corners, and now mainly happens on [[Twitter]]. | |||
These games account for much of modern public discourse, but do not easily fall into Carse’s rubric. Each player’s ostensible goal is to win by proving definitively that his opponent is wrong. | |||
This therefore has the ''appearance'' of a run-of-the-mill two-hander finite game: fixed rules, fixed sides and ostensibly clear success criteria — except that it is nothing of the kind, as there is no time boundary and the named of the game is to keep going which, as long as you're opponent still had breath in him, you can happily do, as each side wittingly, if not willingly, supplies intellectual straw men for his opponent to carry on knocking down. | |||
Axiomatic that neither player will ''ever'' accept any opponent’s argument as a decisive, or even wounding, blow, and play will continue without conclusion, to the great delight of all participants (though it is a delight which presents as studied outrage at what the opponent is saying, but is really nothing of the kind) and the profound ''ennuyeux'' of everyone else. | |||
There are many flavours of these games — they are not finite or infinite so much as [[interminable game|interminable]]: left versus right; Brexit versus Remain, anything involving critical theory or social justice, religion, political orientation or football team primacy. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Paradigm failure]] | *[[Paradigm failure]] | ||
*[[Interminable game]] | |||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||
{{c|Big ideas}} | {{c|Big ideas}} | ||