Views on the Relevance of Game Theory

James Friedman

Rationality and Society, 1992, vol. 4, issue 1, 41-50

Abstract: This article comments on the works by Michael Hechter, Gordon Tullock, and Aaron Wildavsky that are critical of game theory. Although most of the points raised by the authors have merit, some are not relevant to game theory (as opposed to the misuse of game theory within social science). Those points pertaining to game theory vary in importance from quite central to exceedingly peripheral.

Date: 1992
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1043463192004001006 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:ratsoc:v:4:y:1992:i:1:p:41-50

DOI: 10.1177/1043463192004001006

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Rationality and Society
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().