In the end you vest social power in individuals or in institutions. Game A has chosen the latter. When faced with some problem, the answer is always to build some institution around the problem that is (carefully or not) engineered to process that problem into some less problematic state. Have a problem with people doing stupid things with guns? Invoke the justice and regulatory institutions by passing a law that requires background checks for anyone who wants to buy a gun.

The game~b alternative is to focus on creating people who can make good decisions. Which at base means focusing on individual's capacity and discernment and combining them in fulfilling ways that simultaneously takes advantage of their capacity and tends to upgradient their capacity.

Game A: assume the other guy is a sociopath and attempt to structure a formal contractual relationship that bounds his behaviour using different institutional forces (e.g., the justice system).
game~b: shake hands on a good deal with a good person.

Game A: value your relationships for how they can help you (whats in it for me?)
game~b: value your relationships for their own sake (whats in it for us?)

Game A: Construct an institution to enforce good behaviour around commons
game~b: Construct a community whereby every individual's horizon of wellbeing includes the wellbeing of the commons



Return to Knowledgebase