From: tcmay@got.net
...certainly a Schelling point or evolutionary game theory interpretation of what we call "rights" is superior to an appeal-to-God or "natural rights" interpretation. ........................................................................ .................
So there is the "game theory" interpretation of "rights" as would be understood by an individual within a group of 2 or more, or a "society" of many individuals, and then there is the interpretation of how anyone might interpret the concept even if they were not a member of any society but lived totally alone in the wilderness? I don't know why these would be categorized as being part of a "game" - evolutionary or otherwise. A game is something that is evaluated somewhat outside the context of our regular life - a diversion, an accessory, even if it also can be taken seriously or if it can become a career for some people. It is not given the same significance as other practical pursuits like medicine or engineering, which are intended to have definite, practical, beneficial results. Any person normally posseses some ability to determine the propriety to themselves of certain things in existence: they have some measure of ability to make judgements over what is "right" or "wrong" for humankind similar to themselves. Most people develop some sensitivity to the difference between that which is destructive to the goals & values of living things versus that which is supportive of them; most everyone is expected to improve the ability to think about these things as they grow up, even if they don't hold formal arguments with anyone else about it. But people's minds work on overtime and just because they can make judgements, they therefore do make judgements, and furthermore they intend that everyone else should accept these same conclusions - they go into "global mode", expecting that their perspective will be incontestably valid over all. But I wouldn't think that they imagine themselves to be playing a game. I think they're quite serious about it, and "rightly" so, as the consequences of these decisions have major effects upon the quality of their life and happiness. I think that to think of these concepts in terms of game theory is to miss the place of significance which these decisions have in the life of conscious, self-determining beings like ourselves; that it doesn't do justice to the need to achieve correspondence with the facts of life & molecular physics. Or, what's the Prize for these Olympics (and who cares)? .. Blanc ~ Blanc