| Popis: |
Q: We could take your talk yesterday on ‘‘Relationships’’ as a starting point. That talk is a follow-up to your paper ‘‘What is Game Theory Trying to Accomplish,’’ which you presented in Finland some years ago. Selten acted as a discussant for that paper. He agreed with some of the points you made, but disagreed with others. It would be nice to make an inventory of what has happened since that time. Have your opinions gotten closer together or have they drifted further apart? Do you agree that this is a good starting point for the interview? A: Fine. Q: Let us recall your position. Yesterday you said that science is not a quest for truth, but a quest for understanding. The way you said this made it clear that you have to convince people of this point; not everybody agrees with your point of view, maybe even the majority does not agree. Is that true? A: You are entirely right. The usual, naive, view of science is that it is a quest for truth, that there is some objective truth out there and that we are looking for it. We haven’t necessarily found it, but it is there, it is independent of human beings. If there were no human beings, there would still be some kind of truth. Now I agree that without human beings there |
