Game Theory and Nash Equilibrium
Formal analysis of situations where your payoff depends on what others choose, with equilibrium as the point at which no player gains by deviating alone. It explains why rational competitors settle into outcomes none of them wanted, from price wars to underwriting cycles. The practical use is to model the other side's incentives rather than their stated intentions.
13 books · 1 people behind it · 4 resources
Start here
- Thinking StrategicallyAvinash K. Dixit, Barry J. Nalebuff, 1991
- The Evolution of CooperationRobert Axelrod, 1984
- Theory of Games and Economic BehaviorJohn von Neumann, Oskar Morgenstern, 1944
The people behind it 1
Each person holds a book in this entry or names it in their own tags.
Journalists 1
Resources 4
- Game TheoryShane Parrish · essay · Payoffs when your outcome depends on other players.
- Coordination ProblemsShane Parrish · essay · Why rational individuals reach collectively bad outcomes.
- Mutually Assured DestructionShane Parrish · essay · Equilibrium held by the cost of defecting.
- Tit for Tat and CooperationShane Parrish · essay · Axelrod's winning strategy in the repeated dilemma.
Books 13
T1 On War
Carl von Clausewitz · 1835 · Friction, fog and the limits of planning; the classic on strategy
Sun Tzu · 1900 · Classical strategy: position, deception and choosing when to fight
Thomas C. Schelling · 1960 · Commitment, threats and bargaining; the founding text of strategic conflict
James P. Carse · 1986 · Games played to win against games played to continue play
Steven Pinker · 2025 · Common knowledge as the hidden coordination mechanism in social life
T3 Nonzero
Robert Wright · 2000 · History read as an expanding series of non-zero-sum games
Michael Suk-Young Chwe · 2001 · Common knowledge and coordination; why rituals and advertising work
Ken Binmore · 2008 · Binmore on when Bayesian decision theory applies and when it does not