the connections between how we learned technology and how we teach it is getting clearer… I also love the answer to the last question – you’ll have to watch to know what I’m talking about! =)

Similar Posts:

• I can haz teknoluhgee – conclusion… (3) |
• i can haz teknoluhgee – pt3 (2) |
• I can haz teknoluhgee? [part 1] (4) |

Game theory was applied—or as the documentary argues misapplied—to human behavior by a well known academic and Hollywood biopic subject John Nash.  Game Theory’s main tenets according to the film are that a given party will act in their own self interest, that their actions will be logical, and that therefore based on situation you can predict behavior.  Adam Curtis goes on to argue that Game Theory paints a pessimistic view of human nature and alludes that this view is incorrect. (He provides no counter argument as to the true nature of people.) Much to the documentarian’s chagrin, John Nash’s ideas about human behavior were subsequently applied to psychology, economics, and government by R.D. Laing. Curtis postulates that Because of the ‘negative’ view of human beings’ nature and the overwhelming pervasiveness of the notion in society, modern people are treated by their governing institutions as living machines. We all supposedly behave in a given pattern, or rather; we all play the game of life. Everyone’s behavior can be predicted by statistics. Adam Curtis goes on to argue that governments set targets and goals determined by statistical modeling to free people from pretending that they care about anything other than their own self interest in work, government or any aspect of life.

After reaching the conclusion that we all play by the numbers, I had to ask myself, why does Adam Curtis marginalize statistics? I think the maker of The Trap provides a relatively narrow narrative of the past 50 years. While I cannot argue effectively in a short essay whether or not the quest for freedom has been the focus of geopolitics in the last half century, I can cite that the rise of the digital era had already began when Mr. Nash was cooking up his menacing ideas about human behavior. The electronic computer was a powerful tool that had been developed in WWII before Game Theory was expanded upon at Rand—the think tank Nash worked for. During the time period that Mr. Curtis covers in The Trap, there was a gradual transition of the computer from scientific tool, to corporate data processor, to personal device. With the rise of digital technology and the internet, the government, corporations, and other entities have the ability to gather massive amounts of information about its citizens, consumers, and the everyday person.  In fact some of the first tabulation machines–an ascendant of modern computers–were made for the 1890 US census. These developments gave us immensely powerful tools for number crunching to identify trends in not only human behavior but natural events. Also, statistical modeling has been around since at least the 1830s when it was utilized in the field of astronomy (Stigler, p.2). We are now able to quantify like we never have before. We utilize algorithms, like those used for search engines, to make sense of the massive amount of information available.

The computer and statistics began to be developed independently of the counter culture of the 60s and the mental health epidemic, and by the time the big scary Maggie Thatcher came into office, they were already here.  I know I am foraying into technological determinism. But, I believe that if Game Theory hadn’t existed, the programmers in the 50s and 60s as well as the good people at IBM would have still worked away at developing new machines. The computer would have risen to the top of our technological heap. We would have quotas and assumptions about what we are likely to do as a person because of the statistical tools now at our finger tips. Based on data gathered from a large population you could predict behavior.  So even if Game Theory did turn us into walled off machines that fill quotas, were we not already headed in the direction with the rise of the computer?

But, we did live in a world were Game Theory existed.  In the documentary Britain’s National Health Service’s employees began to find creative ways to fill their quotas to the detriment of the patient. The police departments began to artificially lower their crime statistics using methods that Curtis claimed were a frightening development.  But, these two examples are excellent illustrators of Game Theory. We look out for number one first. We follow our own self interests. Is Game Theory so wrong? Would we be in world of quotas and statistics now if John Nash had not expanded on Game Theory? I think statistics and quotas naturally developed because we are more capable of crunching the numbers not because it allows us to think we are free to act in our own self interests.

Computer: A History of the Information Machine is an excellent book about the history surrounding the rise of the computer if you are interested in learning more.

The History of Statistics: The Measurement of Uncertainty before 1900 by Stephen M. Stigler is one of the many books out there that discusses the long history of the field of statistics.Similar Posts:

• A Better Title for The Trap (2) |
• Trapped- Mental Illness and Computers (4) |
• “Juking the Stats” (5) |