Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 beta 3/9/83; site grkermit.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!grkermit!chris
From: chris@grkermit.UUCP (Chris Hibbert)
Newsgroups: net.philosophy
Subject: Re: Life as basis for good vs evil - (nf)
Message-ID: <472@grkermit.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-Jul-83 13:09:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: grkermit.472
Posted: Fri Jul  1 13:09:48 1983
Date-Received: Fri, 1-Jul-83 19:37:05 EDT
References: ucbcad.134 <337@mit-eddi.UUCP>
Organization: GenRad Inc., Concord, MA
Lines: 18

This idea (using the model of a zero-sum game as a metaphor for life and
society) is not new.  Lester Thurow of MIT wrote a book recently called "The
Zero Sum Society."  I haven't read the book, I just mention it as an example
of how common the idea is.  

The problem with this formulation is that life and society are almost always
a positive sum game if there is any cooperation at all.  This is the basis
of the industrial revolution.  Any invention (or even any small good idea)
improves the lot of the person or people who make use of it, and as long as
other people's right to their own property is respected, they are made no
worse off.  

If people generally don't respect rights, then the whole system is a
negative sum game.  If people can't count on being able to benefit from
their labor or ideas, then they will learn not to bother trying.  

Only in the case of "every man is an island" does life become a zero sum
game.  And the proverb says that just doesn't happen.