The value of game theory as with any other formal system of logic is that
it imposes a discipline on thinking. If one is competent, using the
system assures that the conclusions follow from the premises. The system
it self has no content.
Granted, there are those who practice what Schumpeter called the
Ricardian vice--a confusion of the model and reality.
I have seen many a piece of 'demotic prose' that was severely logically
flawed and no one seemed to notice. (Pick your favourite fashionable
French philosopher).
Using the language of game theory also has a secondary benefit. It has a
rhetorical aspect. Economists will read it. Whereas, the so-called
criticism of the discipline has no rhetorical value 'outside a small
circle of friends.'
Rod
Doug Henwood wrote:
>
>
> For this you need game theory and a formal model? Is there anything
> here that couldn't be conveyed in three or four sentences of demotic
> prose?
>
> Doug
--
Rod Hay
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
The History of Economic Thought Archive
http://socserv2.mcmaster.ca/~econ/ugcm/3ll3/index.html
Batoche Books
http://Batoche.co-ltd.net/
52 Eby Street South
Kitchener, Ontario
N2G 3L1
Canada
