yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

Game theory can explain humanity’s biggest problem | Steven Pinker


3m read
·Nov 3, 2024

Processing might take a few minutes. Refresh later.
  • The ideals of the Enlightenment—that we can use knowledge to improve human well-being—aren't particularly natural. For most of our history and pre-history, there was no knowledge that you could act on to do things like reduce infection, reduce tribal warfare, or to extend life. Until recently, that would've been a crazy thing even to hope for. So it's not intuitive, and there's always a tendency toward backsliding.

For example, there's the blowing off of scientific findings, of the efficacy of vaccines, the reality of climate change. The war in Ukraine, another bloating of enlightenment values: the idea that the ultimate good is the lives of people. For Putin, maybe several hundreds of thousands of people dying, their schools, their hospitals, their apartments reduced to rubble, a small price to pay for the glory and the avenging of the humiliation of the Soviet Union.

We're not wired for enlightenment humanism, but nonetheless, we ought to endorse it. We ought to advance it. We ought to remind ourselves of what's so great about it. One idea that is essential to make sense of our current predicament comes from ‘game theory.’

Game theory is: What's the rational thing to do if you are in a situation where the outcome depends on what other rational people do. And the ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ is a game-theoretical predicament where what everyone does that's rational for them leaves everyone worse off when everyone does it. There are lots of situations in which tragedies of the commons confront us: If I wait for the bus in the rain instead of driving my SUV, I'm not gonna save the climate, so it makes sense for me to take the SUV. Well, if everyone thinks that, then we're all in danger of being cooked.

An additional arena in which that we have a tragedy of the commons is rationality itself. You got a person who thinks, "Should I believe this, or should I believe that? Well, if I believe this, I will be a hero in all the people that matter to me." Another member of the group thinks that and another member, and they all think, "Well, if you doubt that, then you're making us look kind of stupid and evil."

And if everyone believes that, then you can have two sides, each of which is kind of individually rational in the sense that each one gets the respect of his buddies, his pals, his colleagues, but the whole society is worse off because you just have warring tribes instead of a joint search for the truth. In the case of the rationality comments, you want the commitment to truth as more important than a slogan that makes your side look good in order for everyone to enjoy what is objectively good for everyone.

With all of the threats from the identitarian left and the populist right and the nationalist leaders and the religious fundamentalists, is there any hope? Civilization, in general, tends to drift slowly in directions of greater rationality. Our science really does know more than it did 50 years ago or 100 years ago. A lot of superstitious beliefs have been marginalized. Not just factual beliefs, but moral beliefs.

Slavery, thank goodness we don't have that debate anymore, but 150 years ago our country did. Disenfranchising women, criminalizing homosexuality, segregation of schools. The list goes on of things where we really have made progress.

Humanistic values have a kind of built-in advantage when you think about them in that they're the only things that you can defend when you have a negotiation with someone who is like you.

We'd all rather be alive than dead. We'd rather be healthy than sick. We'd rather be educated than ignorant and illiterate. There's a long list of things that we share because we are human, despite all of our differences in race and religion and ethnicity and nationality—enlightenment humanism is just appealing to that common humanity. It's not particularly intuitive, but it always has that built-in advantage.

  • Get smarter, faster with videos from the world's biggest thinkers. To learn even more from the world's biggest thinkers, get Big Think+ for your business...

More Articles

View All
Khan Stories: Shrey
It was amazing! I don’t think I’ll ever forget in my life. “Mom, I made it to Harvard!” I mean, it was like a Bollywood Hollywood kind of a sentence. I’m Srey. Um, I’m a freshman at Harvard, class of 2022, and I’m from New Delhi, India. I’ve been using …
Why The $1 Electric Scooter Will TAKE OVER The World
And for all the young entrepreneurs out there, just realize that sometimes it’s the most simple ideas that often do the best. I think we have the natural tendency just to overcomplicate things because we believe the more complicated something is, the bett…
Why the Stock Market Might Not Crash...
So I like to think I make pretty down-to-earth investing videos. I generally try and avoid speculation, I avoid trendy stocks, I avoid hype, and instead, I just focus on rational thinking and rational investment. That has led, you know, to a fair bit of c…
Sound Meets Sculpture and Robotics - Tech+Art | Genius: Picasso
They say that every new technology has some potential military application, but I’d like to think that most new technologies seem to have musical possibilities and applications also. For about 300 years, the pipe organ was the most complex thing that huma…
Turn Short-Term Games Into Long-Term Games
Do you want to talk about Pareto optimal? Pareto optimal is another concept from game theory, along with Pareto superior. Pareto superior means that something is better in some ways while being equal or better in the other way, so it’s not worse off in an…
The Future of the Channel, and You
Good morning, internet. I came out here to write and to research, and to think about the channel and its evolution. The Staten Island video, for example, started life as part of the background reading for the Statue of Liberty video. Originally planned to…