main index

P00: frame around

P01: olicognography

P04: popular economics




Graph Start

Core n°
Half complex graph








Analogy & Similarities (imagine, program, do, define; all with care)

Basic Olicognograph: Forms of Reasoning

Human thinking as Games in Economics of Information

"Game Theory describes humans interactions involving conflict, cooperation and competition, the term Interpersonal 'Decision Theory' is synonymous. The terms reflect the fact that most essential features of this field are manifested in parlor games. different forms of strategic or cooperative game models have been developed. The Normal (or Strategic) Form describes the strategic alternatives, the Extensive Form reflects the evolvement of games in time as governed by players' successive decisions during play. In particular, Repeated Games with Incomplete Information describe iterated plays of the same randomly influenced game about which the players receive asymmetric information. The Coalitional Form describes power of coalitions".

"Equilibria and solutions represent various approaches to solve games or to describe stable, fair, expected or just likely payoffs of games. In mechanism design an imperfectly informed planner with limited enforcement power creates rules of a game that ensure that any potential population of players by playing an equilibrium according to those rules ends up with a socially desired state. The Equivalence Principle deals with an important application of game theory to large economies, where due to the dominating power of competition distinct solution concepts asymptotically coincide with the Walrasian equilibria. Recent applications of game theory to evolutionary biology and evolutionary models of social systems and of learning".

"One of the most important contributions to behavioral economics was the Ultimatum Game (UG) formulated twenty-five years ago by Güth, Schmittberger, and Schwarz (1982). Like the Prisoner’s Dilemma game before it, the UG helped revolutionize the way economists think about economic decision making. Results from this game as well as from a variety of other game theoretic experiments showed that, in a variety of settings and under a variety of assumptions, other-regarding motives are a better predictor of behavior than those embodied in Homo economicus".

"Humans regularly exhibit a culturally conditioned sense of fairness and they are willing to enforce cultural norms even at economic cost to themselves. Cross-cultural UG experiments also show that cultural norms vary and that they dramatically affect the average amount offered in the game and the rates of rejection. First, social animals, such as primates, have a sense of fairness and a tendency to cooperate, even at a cost to themselves. Secondly, “lower” animals do appear to behave in accordance with the rational actor model. They are self-regarding in evaluating payoffs, they are not susceptible to the sunk cost effect, and they apparently evaluate payoffs according to expected utility theory.

Economists tend to be skeptical of altruistic behavior because such behavior because of the “free rider” problem. Self-regarding individuals can out-compete altruists by taking advantage of their generosity. As an answer to this objection, argue that altruism arose in humans hand-in-hand with punishment. Altruistic punishment, or punishing others for violating social norms even at cost to oneself, is one way humans deal with free riders and make cooperation work. Apparently, punishing those who do not cooperate actually stimulates the same pleasure centers in the brain that are activated by, for example, eating something sweet".t

"Present human behavior consistently deviates from the rational actor model. A number of experiments have demonstrated that human decisions are strongly influenced by sunk costs. It appears, however, that ignoring sunk costs is a characteristic of the behavior of lower animals, but not humans The animal behavior literature, together with observations of human behavior, suggests that letting sunk costs influence decision-making is a trait that must have something to do with human characteristics such as the presence of complex capital investments and complex institutions in human societies. It is sometimes argued that although individuals may exhibit irrational behavior, such behavior is corrected in groups (as in the rational expectations literature). In fact, research shows that groups are probably more susceptible to the sunk cost effect than are individuals".

Also understand “eureka syndrome” (attributed to Archimedes) is not an ex nihilo revelation (coming from nothing, in the case of Archimedes some hours spent questioning your brain in your bathtub), but a progressive construction, a logically prepared deus ex machina (a Greek theater machine, as god's coming to solve the situation at the end of the play), eventually following a human assembly. That is like essential logic maturation; then it comes: the divine surprise that enables and solves everything in a locked construction. Thereafter, you can try to balance the picture, find symmetries, complete gaps. You not have to leave behind your imagination, sense of creativity and intuitive logic, but without pretending to be the omniscient with your lone contribution. Put your brain at work, individually and collectively, since you can do well, questioning enough on how to solve social issues". You need to understand that analogies will turn, if used, not as imagined, they are intermediate humane speculations, and en effort to detect, from a pattern, a something which wil be made logical or renew.

Biological Economics

Because it is closer to social issues and Nature's complications, biology tends to be more inexact and more arbitrary. Biology or ecology also introduce soon to ethical considerations. Their combinations with political moral values increase problems because we are all directly biologically concerned. For example, recent history put us close to dangerous supremist reasons (Armagedon) on race, genetic and eugenic determinism (after and stil with many religious interpretations - betraying (in our agnostic reason) humane spiritualities. For example, evolutionist laws, have been abused and benne taken as laws for social orders. All sorts of reductions which turned far around true complexity of the sciences that have been used as grounds to these reasons. And these sciences are still well misunderstood.

So which biological structures are best suited for objective reduction? Ideal structures would be:

  • Abundant,
  • Capable of information processing and computation,
  • Functionally important (e.g., regulating synapses),
  • Self-organizing,
  • Tunable by input information (e.g., microtubule-associated protein orchestration),
  • Periodic and crystal-like in structure (e.g., dipole lattice),
  • Isolated (transiently) from environmental decoherence,
  • Conformationally coupled to quantum events (e.g., London forces),
  • Cylindrical waveguide structures,
  • Plasmalike charge-layer coating.

Biological economics without humane sustainability:

  • Supplies in excess for predation and reconvertion with deadly resources,
  • Adapt to stress and waste if stressor disappear,
  • Speculated priorities do not necessarilly match emergencies,
  • Forced normations warrant returns but stress in vain,
  • Recycling of waste by open system has nevertheless a cost, undue if recycling is forced,
  • Biology do not care for teleology (or theology).

Important schemes for biology are the relationships between living organisms, their environment and the information their relative maps carry. In biology, the reproduced part of information is essentially carried by genes, genetic material or nucleic chains, composed of DNA and RNA within various systems, related proteins and biochemical complements of enzymes, chains of enzymes, neurobiology, metabolic pathways, and so on. The relationships between environment and heredity have been the debate in evolution that started seriously in the nineteenth century. It has sometimes produced some socio-interpreters who have incredibly abused a few concepts and derived perverse interpretations as mentioned above.

An Analogy between Biological and Financial (beast) Ecologies

Biological ecology

Financial ecology

species (diversity spontaneously)

trading strategy (often affected by sheeps gregarity)

individual organism (within environment)

trader (often missing care of real economics)

genotype (including epigenesis)

functional representation of strategy (seeking the perfect martingale)

phenotype (depending on environment)

actions of strategy (buying, selling) - winners' autocratic secte)

population (& biosphere)

capital (& selective competition)

external environment (inputs from Sun & Earth)

price and other informational inputs (& opportunities of speculations)

free energy (to useful open inclusive sub-systems)

money (also a mean for returning profits on overrunning cyles of illusions)

niche, island, open areas, biomass differentiation (in energetic flows)

a possible flow of money (and opportunities of microcatchments or massive catchment of real economics depending on financing)

plants (primary producers, producing since Sun's energy+water+atmosphere+ minerals)

strategies that have utility other than profits (anything for one thing)

animals (various levels of consumers, producers of destructions and recycling)

speculators (biased selected game addiction exposed)

selection (much more complex than this word)

capital allocation (more often conceived as a pity parasitism) than such "mission"

mutation, recombination, diversity producing

creation of new strategies for one only compulsion

J. Doyne Farmer

“Darwinism combines a general theoretical framework with pointers to historically and context specific analysis highly relevant to the social sciences.” For economists, this involves a conceptual shift from comparative statics to causal, hierarchical, and synergistic processes. Generalized Darwinism relates to the role of incentives in “selecting” kinds of human behaviors. Generalized Darwinism recognizes that patterns of human behavior are selected and retained on the basis of their compatibility with approved ways of doing things. At any given time, people are rewarded and punished according to how they behave with respect to social norms. Of course within any particular society cultural norms vary with context and one norm is frequently in conflict with other norms".

Human Biological Economics can consider:

  • Create excesses and selection by recycling: provision - efforts - adaptation,
  • Make excess minimum and care complexity probable sustainability of environments,
  • Adapt to stress, prepare to emergencies not wasting too much (with precautionary principle),
  • Reduce probability of emergencies (by environmental complex restorations),
  • Anticipations and probabilities makes priorizations and possible mismatching (preparedness not only for),
  • Limit and reduce risks of death/critical situations (essential identity) but preserve flexibility,
  • Recyle waste may be usefull to open systems but regressions must not be too large,
  • Produce minimum waste, recyle systematically and use in a smart way,
  • Does not care spirituality or teleology without caring at the same time the respect of environment (social and natural),
  • Speculations & means should stay means, care complexity preventing overgeneralizations,
  • Animal spirit of Modern Economy should be tame,
  • Reduce limits and do no reduce access in unfair ways,
  • Understand as peer but judge in the interest of social justice first,
  • Discrepancies or diversity loose social tights and weaken understanding so must enhance alternative relationships, exchange and cooperation
  • Social tights amplify effects but weaken complicated frames (ambiguous effects).

That at Complex Community Level of Participation

"Complexity requires to be able to communicate on a wide range of subjects between professionals, general public, medias of communication, pupils, politicians and business people. Communicate vision, understand how to manage information (right message to the right people using economical means of communication and start again), face disinformation, rumour and gossip. Be one step ahead not much more. Know soon of conflicts for resolution. Understand the dynamics of conflicts and how to achieve mutual agreement. Demonstrate ethics and good practices. Respect all parties. Tolerate different people and variety of perspectives. Be liable, confident and honest. Listen any others. Formulate options and work solutions".

Maureen Hart, "in social participation a good indicator meets criteria, as:

  1. Multidimensionality: multidimensional measurements, linking elements from at least 2 of the 3 categories of social, environmental and economic factors; such as education, with an economic measurement. Another example of an indicator that preserves or creates environmental providing aesthetic and recreational opportunities for area residents.
  2. Long-term Focus: Indicators should have a focus of twenty to fifty years. This is in recognition that long-lasting, positive changes to of a community can take a long time to achieve. It recognizes that sustainability considers the fortunes of future generations, not just the needs of present those. Some cultures, consider the impact of decisions on next generations.
  3. Identification of Problems and Solutions: Instead of just identifying the problems that need to be corrected, effective indicators also need to identify solutions, situations that need to be corrected and the actions that should be taken.
  4. Identify Underlying Problems: Effective indicators seek to identify problems that may be causing other problems. Sustainable development theory is built on the recognition that the economy, environment and social well-being of a community are inextricably linked and interconnected. Problems in one area, or even successful efforts in one area, may cause unintended problems in another.
  5. Diversity: Indicators must measure progress toward meeting goals in terms of all community residents, including minorities. Sustainable development should seek to address the need of the traditionally disposed, not just the stakeholders and leaders.
  6. Amount of Resources, Consumed and Impact of this Consumption: Effective indicators consider not only the amount of resources that are consumed but also the impact of this consumption.
  7. Easily Understandable: Since indicators are intended for use by all community residents, it is essential that they be written in such a way that they are straightforward and easy to understand. It is hard for people to endorse something they do not understand, and sustainable development requires widespread buy-in, involvement and commitment in order to be successful. Locally
  8. Responsive and Globally Responsible: Effective indicators are designed to address goals and vision at the local level. However, they should not improve the local environment, economy or social well-being at the expense of other communities, the region or the world