进化博弈论能在社会学中进化吗

Q4 Social Sciences
Yoshimichi Sato
{"title":"进化博弈论能在社会学中进化吗","authors":"Yoshimichi Sato","doi":"10.11218/OJJAMS.18.185","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although evolutionary game theory has been popular in social sciences, we have seldom checked its utility as a tool in sociology. In this paper I argue that evolutionary game theory is a good tool with which we study evolution of certain types of social order, but that it has a limitation when we apply it to the study of evolution of the division of labor. To prove the argument, I first adopt a working definition of social order as a self-enforcing relationship between action and expectation. Then I adopt the fictitious play and best reply assumptions rather than the hardwired strategy and replicator dynamics assumptions, because the former are fitter for analysis of the self-enforcing relationship. Third, I claim that the core of the division of labor is the creation of new roles and build an evolutionary game theoretic framework of evolution of the division of labor. Finally, I point out that a limitation of evolutionary game theory in the study of evolution of the division of labor as social order is that it assumes a finite set of possible actions, while evolution of the division of labor accompanies new actions. This limitation, however, shows us where to attack to make a breakthrough.","PeriodicalId":39496,"journal":{"name":"Sociological Theory and Methods","volume":"25 1","pages":"185-196"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can Evolutionary Game Theory Evolve in Sociology\",\"authors\":\"Yoshimichi Sato\",\"doi\":\"10.11218/OJJAMS.18.185\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although evolutionary game theory has been popular in social sciences, we have seldom checked its utility as a tool in sociology. In this paper I argue that evolutionary game theory is a good tool with which we study evolution of certain types of social order, but that it has a limitation when we apply it to the study of evolution of the division of labor. To prove the argument, I first adopt a working definition of social order as a self-enforcing relationship between action and expectation. Then I adopt the fictitious play and best reply assumptions rather than the hardwired strategy and replicator dynamics assumptions, because the former are fitter for analysis of the self-enforcing relationship. Third, I claim that the core of the division of labor is the creation of new roles and build an evolutionary game theoretic framework of evolution of the division of labor. Finally, I point out that a limitation of evolutionary game theory in the study of evolution of the division of labor as social order is that it assumes a finite set of possible actions, while evolution of the division of labor accompanies new actions. This limitation, however, shows us where to attack to make a breakthrough.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39496,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sociological Theory and Methods\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"185-196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sociological Theory and Methods\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.11218/OJJAMS.18.185\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sociological Theory and Methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.11218/OJJAMS.18.185","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

虽然进化博弈论在社会科学中很受欢迎,但我们很少检查它作为社会学工具的效用。在本文中,我认为进化博弈论是我们研究某些类型的社会秩序进化的好工具,但当我们将其应用于研究劳动分工的进化时,它有一个局限性。为了证明这一论点,我首先采用了社会秩序的工作定义,即行动和期望之间的自我执行关系。然后,我采用了虚构的游戏和最佳回应假设,而不是固有的策略和复制因子动力学假设,因为前者更适合于分析自我执行关系。第三,提出劳动分工的核心是新角色的创造,并构建了劳动分工演化的演化博弈论框架。最后,我指出进化博弈论在研究作为社会秩序的劳动分工进化时的一个局限性是,它假设了一组有限的可能行动,而劳动分工的进化伴随着新的行动。然而,这种限制向我们展示了在哪里可以取得突破。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Can Evolutionary Game Theory Evolve in Sociology
Although evolutionary game theory has been popular in social sciences, we have seldom checked its utility as a tool in sociology. In this paper I argue that evolutionary game theory is a good tool with which we study evolution of certain types of social order, but that it has a limitation when we apply it to the study of evolution of the division of labor. To prove the argument, I first adopt a working definition of social order as a self-enforcing relationship between action and expectation. Then I adopt the fictitious play and best reply assumptions rather than the hardwired strategy and replicator dynamics assumptions, because the former are fitter for analysis of the self-enforcing relationship. Third, I claim that the core of the division of labor is the creation of new roles and build an evolutionary game theoretic framework of evolution of the division of labor. Finally, I point out that a limitation of evolutionary game theory in the study of evolution of the division of labor as social order is that it assumes a finite set of possible actions, while evolution of the division of labor accompanies new actions. This limitation, however, shows us where to attack to make a breakthrough.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Sociological Theory and Methods
Sociological Theory and Methods Social Sciences-Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信