
doi: 10.1002/aps.1381
handle: 11576/2596982 , 11576/2512205
ABSTRACTThe paper compares psychoanalysis and non‐cooperative Game Theory and asks if the concepts used in Game Theory are compatible with and add to the knowledge about human thinking and human actions provided by psychoanalysis. We propose a common and novel ground in which this interdisciplinary comparison can be articulated: both Game Theory and the unconscious posit a Law. Our main result is that the law of satisfaction describing the Freudian unconscious and the law of strategic interaction implied by Game Theory are not simply incompatible but in frontal opposition to each other; they create a crossroad at which the imputable individual has the possibility to choose either one law or the other. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Game Theory, strategic interaction, partnership, law of satisfaction, unconscious
Game Theory, strategic interaction, partnership, law of satisfaction, unconscious
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 1 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
