Game Theory is a new and young science. It has a rudimentary mathematical structure that helps predict the best strategy to pursue in any situation where there are rules and turns; a strict regimen that may allow the gaining of an advantage by one player over another.
Newton on his beach, playing with his pebbles, put the language of numbers around what humans and instinctive life had been doing in their heads all along Ė all sorts of calculus and projectile maths. Without realising it, we carry out these calculations through judgement, meaning we can do exciting things like catch balls (...as done by humans, dogs, dolphins, seals...) fly (...birds, bats, insects, Keanu Reeves...) and dodge leaping sabre-toothed tigers (everyone).
I think the same is true with game theory. With abstract games weíve created, where the rules are only what we say they are, things are more mathematical. Newton and his latter-day buddies, step forward, pebbles in hand.
Life, on the other hand, is a lot more intuitive.
Iíve been thinking about this for a while, and itís not necessarily seeing Matrix Revolutions this weekend thatís brought out this post.
If life were a game, what could you do?
Could you achieve more with a degree of emotional or intellectual detachment, as in a game?
Could this detachment come through the rationalisation of everything around you, taking the mathematical or strategic route? Maybe emotional abandonment through having nothing left to lose, or emotional focus elsewhere, like love, reduce the amount of emotional investment in your Ďgameí?
Would it be harder to play the game without detachment?
Why not give it a go?
Donít try and be less emotional, or think everything through to the point where you donít want to take risks anymore. Take something else out of game theory.