Superior Beings. If They Exist, How Would We Know?

: Game-Theoretic Implications of Omniscience, Omnipotence, Immortality, and Incomprehensibility by Steven J. Brams Review by: Thomas P. Faase The College Mathematics Journal, Vol. 16, No. 5 (Nov., 1985), pp. 430-431 Published by: Mathematical Association of America Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2687008 . Accessed: 21/11/2013 07:17
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Mathematical Association of America is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The College Mathematics Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 61.95.193.239 on Thu, 21 Nov 2013 07:17:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

the mind include: (a shortcut Tversky. Examples Representativeness takes in dealing so complicated that they with real world problems would choke a computer), when people judge the &y_aila_k?lijky_ (occurs other likelihood of something happening by how easily they can call to of the same thing to mind), L??_s_avoidance (the tendency examples avoid risks when seeking to avoid but choosing risks losses), gains of a course Framing (the frame in which a problem is seen influences that and Neglect o_i ths. B&2?. ?a?? (the belief action), by an individual he or she is immune to the laws of probability). Numerous well chosen is are given to illustrate The article these principles. examples "must" reading for anyone interested or in courses in problem solving statistics. CGM Computer Recreations, 1985) 15-24. A. K. Dewdney. Scientific American 252:2 (August

set of the Mandelbrot illustration color August's cover is a beautiful the Named after generated by the author. by a program described inventor of fractal geometry, Benoit B. Mandelbrot of the IBM Thomas J. of those complex numbers c Watson Research the set consists Center, is such that the sequence (c2- +c)* +c,..., c, c1 + c, z*_,+c,... z^= set is bounded in absolute The boundary of the Mandelbrot value. The program called it has fractional fractal dimension). (i.e., set and MANDELZOOM can be used to view any portion of the Mandelbrot color those without can be adapted to run on most micros including a review of complex numbers and thus makes monitors. Dewdney includes to the the article to a wide range of students. accessible Returning on finite the author shows that iterating the squaring finite, process In particular, sets can also produce beautiful combinatorial patterns. modulo 100. AOH he determines the orbits of n?^n1 on the integers

Media

Correspondents

SLF Susan L. KD Karl David; LC Leo Chosid; DWB Donald W. Bushaw; JJK James J. AOH Adam 0. Hausknecht; Friedman; LSG Louise S. Grinstein; G. Moore; VNM Vedula N. Murty; Kaput; LHL Lester H. Lange; CGM Charles AHS Alan H. Schoenfeld PR Peter Ross; DIS David I. Schneider;

Superior Beings. If They Exist, How Would We Know?: Game-Theoretic Implications of Omni? and Incomprehensibility, science, Omnipotence, Immortality, by StevenJ. Brams,Springer-Verlag, New York, 1983. This book asks the question:"If thereexisteda superior qualities beingwho possessedthe supernatural how would he/she act differently and incomprehensibility, of omniscience, immortality, omnipotence, at timeswitha fromus?" The answergivenby thisbook would say thathe/she would act arbitrarily rationalwarrant. thoroughly 430

This content downloaded from 61.95.193.239 on Thu, 21 Nov 2013 07:17:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

The qualities enumeratedhere are rationallyand ingeniouslydefined by this work in strictly of a playerin a 2-player is defined Omniscience the terms. as "the ability game to predict game-theoretic is definedas either otherplayer'sstrategy choice (beforehe makesit.)" Omnipotence (the Moving-power (one player'sabilityto delay choice abilityto move when the otherplayermuststop) or Staying-power of threatening is definedas Threat-power, untilaftertheotherplayer'schoice.) Immortality thestrategy a mutually outcome in a singlegame, withthisstrategy consideredrationalover the disadvantageous novel and bedrock concept of this book's long-runof repeated games. Incomprehensibility?the the notionof mixedstrategies to nonconstant sum games in whichit by extending argument?isdefined choices. may be optimalto make certainrandomstrategy Brams employsgame theorynot to prove or disprove the existenceof superiorbeings, but to and deductiveset of ways. He intendsthiswork characterize questionsabout themin a veryformalized to provide"conceptualguides forthinking about certainreligious-theological-philosophical questions." Most notably, thiscomes back timeand again to the problemof evil. Bramsdeals withsuperior way, on the one hand. He treatsthe superior beingsin a quite irreverent resentful and one forwhom the end justifiesthe means. He cites ample scriptural being as deceptive, he speaks of. On theotherhand,he is quite reverent in thathe treats and orthodox backingforthetraits in dealingswithpersonsand he treats the superior beingas highly engagedand personalistic personsas freewill. havingfreewill,albeit limited Brams works fromand arrivesat a theoretical agnosticism.He favors a view that thereis "a all beliefin an ultimate From his analysis,he suggests fundamental that reality." instability underlying thediscovery "arbitrariness He offers that"theremay be a logic in the may not be totally inexplicable." of lifeand its choices." He arrives and incoherence at thisfromhis analysis apparentindeterminateness of incomprehensibility his careful and from that"games thatare not alreadyundecidable demonstration so by thearbitrariness it may be rationalfor(the superior intotheir maybe rendered being)to introduce play." to theproblemof evil from Bramsends up offering relief within thegame-theoretic model by saying that"thereis a pervasive thatsupportsundecidability and arbitrary behavior."He adds, "In rationality both reasonand evidencereenforce, I think, the Great Mystery." short, movesbetweentheextremes fromlogical formalisms of rationalism and fideism, Theologicalinquiry of thought to subjectivelongingsfor the transcendent. extreme. Its Clearly,Brams' work fitsthe first sourcesin scripture kindof starting are takenas strictly a fundamentalist literal, point.Whilehe is versed in some of the writings of the "God-question",thesewritings about the metaphysics and epistemology falloutsidethescope of his game-theoretic framework. Fromtheviewof an instructor in mathematics, thisworkwould be an interesting and intense arrayof illustrations. Brams elucidates six games in particular:revelation,chicken,punishment, fascinating commitment, (These games are numbers57, 66, 44, 68, 12 and 77, prisoners'dilemma and testing. in Rappaportand Guyer'staxonomy.) respectively, From theviewof a sociologist of religion, theworkis an intellectual tourde forcethatwithholds any the tradition it draws upon by reason of its veryliteralist allegiancesof faithand caricatures reading. Brams reconstrues into the veryprecisesense of game-theoretic the sense of the supernatural Further, within themodel,comes up withconclusions conceptsand, from properto thatmodel.To a largeextent, the conclusionsare exclusively usefulto religiouspractitioners, properto that model and not terribly Of course,he is not the first generally. "religious analyst"about whomthatcould be said! An earlierarticleby Brams was assailed as indulging in the "luxuryof playingdishonestgames" and theopennessof Brams'workoverwhelmingly refutes that.For those (Richards,1981). Both therigor who are askinga questionabout theproblemof evil within theframework of game theory, thisbook is a on superior credibleand trenchant reflection beingsand theproblemof evil. For thosewho are askinga thisbook is a workmoreof art thanof scienceand it resembles, morethananything I question, religious can think or beforetheGreat Mystery. of,playingbeforethe Almighty REFERENCES 1. AnatolRappaportand MelvinGuyer,"A Taxonomyof 2 x 2 Games," GeneralSystems:Yearbook of theSociety Research.13 (1966) 195-201. for GeneralSystems 2. Ian Richards, News and letters, Mathematics Magazine 54 (May, 1981) 148. Thomas P. Faase St. Norbert College 431

This content downloaded from 61.95.193.239 on Thu, 21 Nov 2013 07:17:24 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions