Relying on my admitted poor memory, game theory was considered something a
novelty until about 1980, when interest started to grow. It became somewhat
standard in graduate courses about 1990, and is now routinely taught at the
undergraduate level. The reasons probably are both internal to game theory and
external. I.e., some break through in the theory combined with the failure of the
alternatives. But I don't know the details well enough to speculate. Did Mirowksi
have anything to say on the break out from RAND?
Rod
Michael Perelman wrote:
> I just attended a talk by Phil Mirowski. He says that game theory did not
> exist except at RAND, where von Neuman convinced the boys that it would be
> useful for military strategies.
>
> Chris Burford wrote:
>
> > Scanning the debate on game theory last month, I was not sure how much a
> > historical materialist perspective came through. I mean by this, locating
> > game theory in the current stage of development of the means of production.
> >
> > It seems to me that game theory is one of a number of theories which start
> > from an individualist premise, and then lead inexorably to an examination
> > of the overall social pattern produced by the interconnections between
> > individuals. In the hands of more thoughtful people, it leads back to
> > systems analysis and a questioning of its own reductionist assumptions.
> >
> > This mirrors the state of a global economy in which the circulation of
> > individual commodities has never been more intense, but which is in urgent
> > need of overall management and social foresight.
> >
> > Chris Burford
> >
> > London
>
> --
>
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Chico, CA 95929
> 530-898-5321
> fax 530-898-5901
--
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
