Arrives by Tuesday, Oct 8. Or get it by Mon, Sep 30 with faster delivery. Pickup not available. Product Highlights About This Item We aim to show you accurate product information. Manufacturers, suppliers and others provide what you see here, and we have not verified it. See our disclaimer. The book provides a thorough treatment of set functions, games and capacities as well as integrals with respect to capacities and games, in a mathematical rigorous presentation and in view of application to decision making.
After a short chapter introducing some required basic knowledge linear programming, polyhedra, ordered sets and notation, the first part of the book consists of three long chapters developing the mathematical aspects. This part is not related to a particular application field and, by its neutral mathematical style, is useful to the widest audience. It gathers many results and notions which are scattered in the literature of various domains game theory, decision, combinatorial optimization and operations research.
The second part consists of three chapters, applying the previous notions in decision making and modelling: decision under uncertainty, decision with multiple criteria, possibility theory and Dempster-Shafer theory. Customer Reviews. Write a review. See any care plans, options and policies that may be associated with this product. Email address. Please enter a valid email address.
Walmart Services. Get to Know Us. Customer Service. In The Spotlight. Shop Our Brands. A player that has been both good and evil will be hunted by both for past actions because a change in karma does not erase the memory of past actions. The only character that is safe from such attacks is the neutral since taking the middle course is likely to avoid harsh reactions from others and is exceedingly difficult to remain neutral in a world that demands action.
Experience and karma come together to give the player a title. In the original game there were twenty levels of experience and combined with the three basic moral affiliations of good, evil and neutral, there are sixty titles in all. A level one evil character is a "Vault Delinquent," a level ten neutral is an "Observer," and a level 20 good character is the "Last, Best Hope of Humanity. They show how other characters in the game perceive the player. The developers clearly think that neutrality is the course that most people take as good and evil characters earn lofty titles and the titles indicating neutrality stress how average the player is.
The level 20 neutral title is Paradigm of Humanity and at 30, the highest level possible, one becomes a "True Mortal" while "Messiah" and "Devil" go to the good and evil players respectively. Allowing players to be neutral is one of the Fallout series' most significant innovations as most games force them to choose between good and evil. Neutrality is the hardest path to take in the game. Again this is not a flaw in the game because it reflects the reality that neutrality is a hard to define. As it is commonly used, neutrality is staying aloof from moral dilemmas and not intervening on behalf of any interested parties.
However, this kind of neutrality is usually not true neutrality because refusing to play a role in a conflict amounts to allowing the stronger side to win. In Fallout 3 the character has to make choices - there is no simple neutrality of nonintervention. The karma scale improved through each installment of the Fallout series. In the original game there was reputation, which acted like karma but lacked the same moral connotation. There were also few special perks for having a positive or negative reputation, but not as many as in Fallout 3. Unlike Fallout 3 , morality only made minor changes to gameplay.
There were no factions hunting down a player just for having a bad reputation nor were there any locations made unavailable to players based on morality. Although the moral dimension was less overt in Fallout 3 , Fallout did have greater scope for immoral action as well as particular labels that would attach to the player based on misconduct. There was, for example, the "child killer" label bestowed on a player who killed three or more children. This would provoke bounty hunters to come after the player and NPCs were aware of the standing. In Fallout 2 the karma scale was introduced and the range of potential moral and immoral actions was expanded as the game included new opportunities for drug us and subquests having to do with pornography and mafia killings.
Yet, it did suffer from a few shortcomings. The reputation system was still present in Fallout 2 , making it and karma two different scales on which the player could be judged and there were not as many perks based on the player's karma level. The karma system is one of the series' greatest innovations, but what truly sets it apart from other games are the challenging and innovative quests. The quests of Fallout 3 differ greatly in their content and their degree of moral sophistication.
The residents are aware of the bomb and a cult even worships it and bathes in the radioactive water that it sits in, but until the player arrives no one has the skill to defuse it. The player is approached by the scheming NPC Mr.
- Set Functions, Games and Capacities in Decision Making.
- Lost at Sea: Ghost Ships and Other Mysteries.
- Set Functions, Games and Capacities in Decision Making!
- Recommended for you.
Burke, who offers the job of detonating the bomb in exchange for money and an apartment, but at the cost of -1, karma. The reason he gives for needing the city destroyed is that it is an ugly place that blocks a clear view of the Capital Wasteland. A good player can get the quest of disarming the bomb from the town sheriff Lucas Simms then capture Mr. This course of action only results in a gain of karma, making the good and bad courses of action vastly disproportionate in karmic impact. There is no middle ground between the extremes of destroying the town and saving it.
What is more, there are not even significantly different results. Destroying Megaton results in higher pay, but either resolution earns the same experience point bonus and a new home. Each also results in vigilantes or mercenaries hunting the player in retaliation. Of course, the game is changed by the removal of the city, but this is not a change to the main character. In The Pitt , a Fallout 3 expansion, the player is faced with a moral decision that is far less clear than most others in the game.
The main quest, "Free Labor," revolves around a difficult choice between freeing slaves and curing a degenerative disease by kidnapping a baby or defending the baby and the scientists looking for a more humane cure to the disease while allowing the slaves to remain oppressed. The designers took a care to present compelling reasons for each choice. The slaves clearly live miserable lives and aspire to something better, but they are also ready to hurt the innocent baby in pursuit of their cure and want to kill all of their former captors, not all of whom seem immoral.
On the other hand, the slavers treat the baby well and they have a strange paternalistic care for the slaves because their leader claims to defend them from the outside world. The masters are flawed because they keep slaves and because the forced labor includes such unnecessarily harsh measures as forcing them to fight each other to the death. Thus the player is forced to weigh two choices that will each produce a great deal of good and evil.
Moral Decision Making in Fallout
This makes the quest far more sophisticated than "The Power of the Atom," but, it is so complicated that the designers themselves seem incapable of resolving it. They assign no good or bad karma for choosing either course, as if to say that there are good reasons for both.
The choice does lead to two different endings, one in which the player may simply leave the city and another in which the player joins a battle to free the slaves, but there are no moral consequences. They player does not have to incur karmic penalties and there are no factions that hunt the player for retribution.
Decisions are most meaningful when they have some moral weight and significant results. In this case the player gets a profound sense of how difficult doing the right thing can be, but the consequences for the action are purely subjective. The strength of the Pitt scenario is not that neither side is entirely good or evil. Up to the moment of decision there are bits of information that help the player understand the situation, yet nothing that conclusively points in one direction or another.
The absence of a complete perspective that games usually provide draws attention to the epistemological difficulty that plagues us in decision making. We only have limited information from which to make moral choices. This information is often woefully inadequate and stops us from making a truly rational calculation.
Good and evil are not chosen based on a careful analysis of all the fact and it is rare that we can even see that one side is good and the other bad at the moment of action. Even when the moral difference would be clear given more information, we rarely know enough before acting to know what results an action will have. The best scenarios for approximating reality and providing an engaging moral dilemma are those that fall somewhere between "Power of the Atom" and "Free Labor. Burke could lie to the player to make his evil plot seem as though it were well-intentioned.
More dishonesty and half-truths from NPCs might be a good way of achieving this. The player has many opportunities to lie in the Fallout 3 dialogues and in a chaotic world of individuals seeking only their own self-interest it is surprising that the NPCs do not dissemble more often. It is particularly strange that those with evil intentions are so forthcoming with their motives.
Quests that force the player to resolve moral dilemmas based on limited evidence would be more challenging. The player would be unable to resolve on their character type for guidance. There are a few quests in the game that approach this ideal. One of the best quests in Fallout 3 and one of the strangest is "Oasis.
Defining Decision Making
It is all because of Harold, a character from each of the preceding games. He used to be a ghoul with a tree growing out of his head, but the tree overtook his body and he became trapped within it. A cult arose to worship him and the trees that grew around him, but the members ignore his pleas for death. Life as a tree is excruciating and so he asks the player to travel underground to find his heart and kill him.
There are three distinct choices to make: to kill Harold and save him from a life of pain, to apply a liniment to accelerate his growth, or to apply sap that will stop him from growing, but keep him alive. The reason for keeping him alive or accelerating his growth is to sustain or even enlarge the forest that has grown up around him. The quest raises the question of euthanasia and to what extent it is worth making an individual suffer for the good of the group.
It is thus an excellent moral test - one with clear practical import. Like "Free Labor" it is a morally complicated quest with no clear correct answer; it is shrouded in ambiguity. Like "Power of the Atom" it encourages the player to form an opinion about what is the right thing to do and it imposes consequences. What sets it apart from them is that it forces players to resolve moral dilemmas that they encounter in the real world, albeit from a new perspective that fosters original thinking.
There are also distinct rewards for and punishments for each of the resolutions, which means that the way in which the quest is resolved affects the rest of the story. Aristotelian virtue ethics is one of the dominant schools of thought in moral philosophy, and, as Miguel Sicart notes Sicart , video games are well-suited to teaching the practical wisdom that is central to virtue ethics. Aristotle avoided giving definitive rules for moral conduct as there are in utilitarian and Kantian ethics and instead argued that moral behavior is learned through practice.
In the Nicomachean Ethics Aristotle characterizes virtue as the mean between extremes. For any given virtue there are two corresponding vices of excess or deficiency Aristotle, , b that must be avoided. Courage, for example, is not simply fearlessness. It is the mean between fear and overconfidence, each of which is a vice Aristotle, , a5.
The same guidelines apply to other virtues. Finding the mean can be difficult because where it lies is contextually dependent. Courage for a soldier is the mean of standing in ranks and marching into battle with his comrades while the extremes are running away from the fight or charging into it alone. Courage means something entirely different for a scholar or a statesman, but it consists in the same ability to find the mean.
The mean is always there, but finding it requires special skill. As Aristotle develops his theory, it becomes clear that seeing what the middle road is in every situation and having the ability to follow it requires a special practical wisdom that he calls phronesis. The theory thus settles on the importance of practical wisdom that allows one to find the mean between extremes and act on it. Practice is a central part of Aristotle's philosophy because it is only through constantly performing virtuous actions that virtue becomes ingrained one's character. Repeatedly finding the mean between vices through practical wisdom strengthens practical wisdom.
It is, like any other skill, one best learned through training rather than through introspection and rational analysis alone. The appeal of this approach is that it explains how moral reasoning can be improved through practice so it becomes second nature. A person with good character does not have to waste time thinking about what course of action is the best as a good person is habituated to doing what is right.
Problem solving decision making process ppt
As Barry says, "Aristotle's approach was, above all, practical" Barry, , p. Those with virtuous characters should be able to recognize moral dilemmas immediately and act correctly because of their cultivated practical wisdom. For Aristotle virtues are akin to technical skills that must be improved through hard work - we should thus take the same approach toward them as we would to improving our ability to read or to draw.
- Small Favor (The Dresden Files, Book 10)?
- Decision-making guide!
- Authority and the Individual: Volume 3 (Routledge Classics).
- Set Functions, Games and Capacities in Decision Making | Michel Grabisch | Springer.
- Using Game Theory to Improve Strategic Decision Making | Financial Post!
- Biological Magnetic Resonance: Volume 2.
Knowing moral principles alone is insufficient to give on the ability to act on them when the time comes so it is essential to practice moral decision making as much as possible. When the moment of decision comes a weak person may see the right course of action, yet lack the character to act on it. Human passions plague the weak person and lead them to habitual bad choices. To make the right choices a person must therefore also be capable of withstanding the costs of doing the right thing.
As in the "Power of the Atom" quest, the immoral choice is often the one that pays better and holds greater appeal for its immediate consequences. One must recognize that this is the alternative leading to long-term harm to one's character. Each of the three scenarios discussed in the preceding section is useful in teaching phronesis. They confront the player with challenges that demand investigation and careful analysis of what consequences are likely to follow from each choice. They transform the player into an active participant in the game rather than a spectator, thereby making gameplay into practice for real-life moral dilemmas.
Even when the scenarios are as fanciful as a mutant transforming into a tree, they make reference to well-known issues such as euthanasia. What matters is not the realism of the narrative but the realism of the problems that it raises. By recasting common problems in a virtual world the player has a chance to work through them and experiment with different outcomes without actually having to live with consequences of a bad choice. Although McCormick defends violent video games on utilitarian and Kantian grounds, he says that they are probably indefensible from an Aristotelian perspective.
He argues that an Aristotelian would say that "By participating in simulations of excessive, indulgent and wrongful acts, we are cultivating the wrong sort of character" McCormick, , p. While it is true that Aristotle might be suspicious of many violent video games, he would not oppose all of them. He was not a pacifist and so would not object to violence as such. What is objectionable in some games is that the violence is the gratuitous killing of innocent people; it is immoral violence.
Some games leave players with no choice but to kill innocent people, but Fallout 3 does not. It allows for killing good and bad characters alike. Choosing the good path, while violent, does not harm one's character as this path provides positive character development. Choosing the bad path does not have the same payoff for character development, but it does have the positive function of allowing the player to experience this way of life in a simulation and to come to a deeper understanding of immorality without causing real harm.
Educators have worked on developing moral dilemma simulators for years. Moshe Sherer conducted a study in of a simulator that measured development according to a moral development calculus developed by Avner Ziv Ziv, The calculus measures moral stages, punishment and posttransgressional reactions of the player and revealed that those who play the simulation scored higher than those who did not.
The simulation offered moral dilemmas derived from real life situations concerning family, friends, school, work, community, society, sex, criminal activity, drugs, money, military service, relationships with other groups, intergroup relationships and general behavior, with around 10 questions in each area.
Players were offered four potential solutions for each problem and were scored based on their response. The scores were specifically designed to reinforce positive behavior and the players knew that they were being judged based on that system Sherer, , p. Based on the evidence of 20 weeks of playing the simulation the authors concluded that "computerized therapeutic simulation games may contribute to the process of moral development of youth" Sherer, , p.
These studies show the potential of simulations to teach moral reasoning and thus lend support to the argument that even practice in the virtual world can improve our ability to think through complex issues. Computer games designed for entertainment are probably far more engaging than those used in Sherer's study and, even when set in fanciful environments, will be more immersive and thus feel more real than educational simulations. Those like Fallout will also be far more open-ended than most education simulators.
The more immersive the environment the more real the experience and thus the more useful it is in giving players practice that is useful in the real world. In video games players can interrogate the game's characters about their motivations and feel the consequences of their actions after their decision is made unlike educational simulators that tend to focus exclusively on the moment of decision without providing it much context.
We should, therefore, see video games as one of the most promising tools for teaching moral-decision making rather than continuously blaming them for social problems. An opponent might claim that the greatest weakness of Fallout 3 when judged as a way of exploring morality is that it does not put forth a moral code. In this regard it seems to be a strange source of moral instruction, yet the lack of a moral message is one of the game's strengths.
It mirrors real life in that one is not forced to obey a particular moral code. The player has a vague notion of what is right and wrong, but does not encounter the game's morality as a coherent system. The consequences of actions are realized after the actions are made.
Using Game Theory to Improve Strategic Decision Making
It does not teach a particular morality. Instead, it shows that there are consequences for every action that arise from the response of other characters; it throws players into a world of moral judgment without offering any definite rules and forces players to t in a morally ambiguous world. This will never lead the player to a systematic moral philosophy, but it will help teach the practical wisdom which Aristotle thought was so much more valuable than theoretical knowledge.
It might be argued that introducing morality into games could be misguided because the developers will always be judging players by the developers' personal values. Again, this is one of the strengths of moral choice engines. Individuals can make autonomous decisions, but these are subject to consequences outside of their control. In the real world, murder is punished as a crime regardless of whether or not the murder thinks the act is justified. The murderer's own feelings about the crime are irrelevant if the legal code and other people consider it wrong.
In the Fallout universe there is no legal system that punishes crimes, yet the same informal sanctions of popular sentiment are at work. Games should reflect the moral values of the developers because this makes the player struggle to understand what moral rules are in effect. It is a strength of games that they make players come into contact with other people's moral judgments. Sicart argues that "Playing is an act of judgment of the rule systems and the fictional world the player is presented with" Sicart, , p.
This is true with for the game's moral system. The developers may make whatever rules they want and the player will still gain experience in applying these to the challenges faced in the game. We can also see that the Fallout deals with morality and especially with consequences more effectively than most other games.
It is rare for individual choice to change the game's content so drastically. One might be arrested in a Grand Theft Auto game for going killing innocent people, but no matter how egregious the crime it can be washed away by avoiding the police for a few minutes and changing the car's paint color. There is either no element of moral reasoning or it is presented in a shallow form of needing to avoid punishment. This is markedly different from the Fallout world in which every action is judged and becomes part of a permanent reputation. While it is true that players are just as likely to play as neutral characters or evil ones, and many players take pleasure in becoming as evil as possible, they are still playing the game according to a moral standard.
The player who consistently tires to be evil is making the same calculations as the consistently good player, going through the same judgments of the consequences of the action, and just choosing to act in a way that will lose karma. Game critics often urge games to do things that they cannot reasonably accomplish or that would compromise the experience of play.
For example, Barrett criticizes GTA: Vice City Rockstar for not serving as a platform for criticizing California's three-strikes laws or drawing attention to the disproportionate rate of imprisonment for African Americans Barrett, , p. This is asking too much of a piece of entertainment, especially because it fails to account for the fact that Vice City is only supposed to resemble a city in California and not actually be located there. The moral dimension of games is, however, one that was created by developers and not forced upon them from the outside.
It adds to the enjoyment of play while having an educative function. It gives games more depth and creates multiple routes through the story for better replayability and a customized experience. Thus it seems fair that commentators draw attention to the moral dimension of games and encourage further improvement of it. The Fallout series is a great illustration of how education and entertainment can meet without compromising the latter.
Barrett, P. Bentham, J. An Introduction to the Principles of Moral Legislation. Garden City: Doubleday. Burke, E. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Juul, J. Luck, M. McCormick, M. Ethics and Information Technology, 3 4 , Peckham, M. Fallout Banned from Sale Down Under. Piot, C. Postcolonial Studies, 6 3 , Ion H.
Fowler, W. M Lamb, Trans.