The game theory against divorces

Linkey

I suppose that the modern sciences as the ethology and the game theory and can reduce the number of divorces in our society. The reason for this is that many divorces are caused by the everyday egoism of spouses, and the modern sciences (their philosophycal aspect) promote a more critical attitude towards egoism.

To illustrate my idea, I suggest reading about the Axelrod's experiment and the game "Evolution of Trust":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Evolution_of_Cooperation

https://www.clearerthinking.org/post/evolution-of-trust-game

I'll give one example to clarify my idea. Let's assume that a husband and wife decide how to spend their time together: either go to a football match together, or to the theater. If they go to a football match, the husband gets two units of pleasure, the wife one. If they go to the theater, the wife gets two units of pleasure, the husband one. If they prefer compromises, they can agree to go both ways alternately, accordingly, they will have an average of 1.5 units of pleasure. But if the wife is authoritarian and has more patience, she can give her husband a choice: either we only go to the theater, or we don't go anywhere. The husband, faced with the choice of receiving one unit of pleasure or receiving nothing, rationally chooses the first and they only go to the theater. But such a policy of the wife imperceptibly destroys their relationships.

In fact, this example is not entirely correct, perhaps somebody here will guess what I mean.

Igitur

↪Linkey

What’s the question you want us to answer?

I agree with the idea you are illustrating, and it could also be helpful to provide a logical connection between the authoritarian action and a divorce (even if it seems obvious).

180 Proof

↪Linkey

In your example, the husband is a simp if he doesn't go to the football match without her; in the long run, the wife will respect him more for ignoring her ultimatums rather than giving in. The reasonable choice is, imo, either they agree to go to an event together or each one goes alone to the respectively preferred event rather than either one trying to force the other to do anything.

Igitur

↪180 Proof

I agree that this is the best path, but it sometimes appears to create problems in marriages that actually had problems to begin with.

Many times this kind of separation (even though it is better for the relationship) is blamed for causing divorce and ending a romantic relationship, but in my opinion, the problem was that the marriage was so weak that it couldn’t handle the separation. It might also be true that a relationship like this is doomed anyways because the wife in the example prioritizes her pleasure in the activity and having her husband with her over her husband’s lack of pleasure caused by being forced to do something he didn’t want to do.

Sometimes, though, to sustain a dying relationship, the husband has to go to the theater anyway, and pretend he wants to, since that preserves the relationship on the wife’s end, the part he has less control over.

The question is, why does he want to preserve that relationship?

Linkey

↪Linkey In your example, the husband is a simp if he doesn't go to the football match without her — 180 Proof

People prefer to do anything together, for example they watch movies together, go for sports together and so on. Let's say that the husband gets 0.5 units of pleasure if he goes to futball alone.

Tarskian

I suppose that the modern sciences as the ethology and the game theory and can reduce the number of divorces in our society. The reason for this is that many divorces are caused by the everyday egoism of spouses, and the modern sciences (their philosophycal aspect) promote a more critical attitude towards egoism. — Linkey

Reducing divorce by getting husbands to simp even harder? If simping harder were the solution, there would be no divorces to begin with. In fact, the opposite is much more likely to be true. As a man, you can reduce the likelihood of divorce by simping less. But then again, why sign a contract in which you are at the mercy of someone else who can just break it and then cash out on you? It is the modern incentive structure of the contract that explains why it gets broken so easily and so often. Therefore, the only way to avoid divorce is not to sign that kind of unreasonable contracts.

180 Proof

The question is, why does he want to preserve that relationship? — Igitur

:up:

Linkey

Reducing divorce by getting husbands to simp even harder? If simping harder were the solution, there would be no divorces to begin with. In fact, the opposite is much more likely to be true. As a man, you can reduce the likelihood of divorce by simping less. But then again, why sign a contract in which you are at the mercy of someone else who can just break it and then cash out on you? It is the modern incentive structure of the contract that explains why it gets broken so easily and so often. Therefore, the only way to avoid divorce is not to sign that kind of unreasonable contracts. — Tarskian

Sorry, I am not a native English speaker and I don't understand the word "simping". Maybe you wanted to say that the husband and wife become "Sims" with my approach? One more person told me so, but I don't understand this argument.

Tarskian

Sorry, I am not a native English speaker and I don't understand the word "simping". Maybe you wanted to say that the husband and wife become "Sims" with my approach? One more person told me so, but I don't understand this argument. — Linkey

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simp

Simp (/sɪmp/ ⓘ) is an internet slang term describing someone who shows excessive sympathy and attention toward another person, typically to someone who does not reciprocate the same feelings, in pursuit of affection or a sexual relationship.[1][2] This behavior, known as simping,[3] is carried out toward a variety of targets, including celebrities,[1] politicians,[4][5] e-girls, and e-boys.[6] The term had sporadic usage until gaining traction on social media in 2019.[7]

Simping for a woman, never helps.

If she is attracted to you, you can pretty much do or not do whatever you want, because she will simply invent her own reasons why she likes it. For example, if she is attracted to you, she will laugh at your jokes even when they are not funny.

If she is not attracted to you, however, you can try to give her whatever you want to change that, but it won't help, because attraction is "not negotiable". So, don't waste your time. Just move on. Find other and better.

In fact, women tend to be attracted to you, if they can see that you have more options than them. So, instead of simping for a particular woman, just ignore her, and interact with other women that are younger and/or prettier than her. If she doesn't care, then hit it off with the other woman. If she does care, you can choose her, the other woman, or both.

Lionino

the husband is a simp if he doesn't go to the football match without her; in the long run, the wife will respect him more for ignoring her ultimatums rather than giving in — 180 Proof

God bless. The "game theory" of anything-relationship must keep in mind that male and female psychology are wildly different. Women don't like, respect, or feel attraction towards push-overs. It is just another instantiation of the "nice guys finish last" universal.

Linkey

God bless. The "game theory" of anything-relationship must keep in mind that male and female psychology are wildly different. Women don't like, respect, or feel attraction towards push-overs. It is just another instantiation of the "nice guys finish last" universal. — Lionino

I have some experience of successfull relationships and I understand that it is not useful to be a simp, on the other hand you must give your wife presents from time to time, otherwise the love will slowly leave your family. And for me, being obsessive/intrusive can a form of egoism. Maybe I don't know the correct word and "obsessive/intrusive" are not fully what I mean, I mean a strong wish to prove with doings that you love her.

The game theory against divorces

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions