Tit for tat is the notion of responding in kind; with a starting condition of cooperation suggests that, if you first meet someone and don't know if they will be cool or not, you act as if they are.
This was expanded in a lot of game theory, in particular dealing with the prisoner's dilemma.
I have no experience of the world in which this game theoretic exercise plays out: The world where everybody comes to the table equal, and the costs and rewards in iteration N+1 are the same for everyone no matter how iterations 1..N played out. In that world, I suspect that "moral" and "expedient" are actually synonyms.
In the world I actually live in, my responding tit-for-tat is frequently immoral, whatever my starting assumptions. Frequently enough for me to avoid using it as a heuristic.
Tony Lower-Basch So, that's interesting, and sounds like "With great privilege comes great need for cooperation", maybe. That is, to cooperate not only in the first iteration, but in later iterations as well, because each time costs you very little and maybe benefits the other person quite a bit.
William Nichols: Something like that, combined with this ... (1) most people don't do one-iteration tit-for-tat, they acquire a running history over time, and (2) in the real world players seldom agree when the game began, or who is on what team.
Depends on your goals, or perhaps what it means to "win" the game. Tit for tat starting fair is great in price wars or whatever, but in social interactions... Well the goals aren't so clear.
Tit for tat is the notion of responding in kind; with a starting condition of cooperation suggests that, if you first meet someone and don't know if they will be cool or not, you act as if they are.
ReplyDeleteThis was expanded in a lot of game theory, in particular dealing with the prisoner's dilemma.
I have no experience of the world in which this game theoretic exercise plays out: The world where everybody comes to the table equal, and the costs and rewards in iteration N+1 are the same for everyone no matter how iterations 1..N played out. In that world, I suspect that "moral" and "expedient" are actually synonyms.
ReplyDeleteIn the world I actually live in, my responding tit-for-tat is frequently immoral, whatever my starting assumptions. Frequently enough for me to avoid using it as a heuristic.
i'd like to vote, but i totally don't understand the question X-)
ReplyDeleteTodd Sprang What do you not understand, and how can I fix it?
ReplyDeleteTony Lower-Basch So, that's interesting, and sounds like "With great privilege comes great need for cooperation", maybe. That is, to cooperate not only in the first iteration, but in later iterations as well, because each time costs you very little and maybe benefits the other person quite a bit.
ReplyDeleteSomething like that?
Contrite tit for tat.
ReplyDeleteWilliam Nichols: Something like that, combined with this ... (1) most people don't do one-iteration tit-for-tat, they acquire a running history over time, and (2) in the real world players seldom agree when the game began, or who is on what team.
ReplyDeleteAdam Dray Expand?
ReplyDeleteDepends on your goals, or perhaps what it means to "win" the game. Tit for tat starting fair is great in price wars or whatever, but in social interactions... Well the goals aren't so clear.
ReplyDeleteBoth. Flashing someone for a free tattoo seems like win win to me. ;)
ReplyDelete