just because
Nash was crazy doesn't mean that he was always wrong. However, the popularity of
his concept of equilibrium may reflect the craziness of the economics
profession.
BTW, a
game matrix can be seen as a simplified picture of a social structure. The
motivations of the "players" don't have to be the narrow greediness of _homo
economicus_ or the paranoid. In the Hargreaves-Heap/Varofakis book, for example,
they examine the behavior of those who follow Kant's categorical imperative.
Obviously, this produces different results.
JD
