for his doctoral dissertation. When a group of women enters the room, the
men begin to boast and tease each other over who has the best chance to
attract the most desirable of the women (stereotypically enough, the blond).
One of the men, referring to Adam Smith, states that in this competition, it
is “every man for himself.” Implied in this chauvinistic bravado is the sense
that only one man will “win” the prize, while the others will have to be con-
tent with the “leftovers;” “those who strike out are stuck with her friends.”
The situation results in an intellectual breakthrough for this fictional ver-
sion of John Nash. He insists that, “Adam Smith needs revision,” and explains
as follows:
If we all go for the blond, we block each other. Not a single one of us is
going to get her. So then we all go for her friends, but they all give us the
cold shoulder, because nobody likes to be second choice. But what if no one
goes for the blond? We don’t get in each other ’s way, and we don’t insult
the other girls. It’s the only way to win.The lesson the viewer is supposed to derive from this scene is that the best
resolution to this competition, the most rational choice when faced with this
situation, is for the group of men to coordinate their actions with each other
so that their own private interests are furthered. The Nash-character deter-
mines that this insight proves that Adam Smith’s conclusions about human
self-interest were incorrect:
Adam Smith said that the best result comes from everyone in the group
doing what is best for himself. Right? Incomplete. Because the best result
will come from everyone in the group doing what’s best for himself andthe
group.This analysis of the situation facing the men in the bar resembles what game
theorists call a “coordination game.” The group of individual (male) agents
are situated within a static environment in which they are confronted with
a choice of action. They then develop a strategy to achieve a desired end that
takes into account the actions of the other agents in the room. The fictional
Nash character calculates the different consequences of all possible actions,
and selects that which maximizes the expected desired outcome. Unlike his
rivals, however, he argues that it is more beneficial for all the men involved
to strategize collectively so as to insure that they each individually achieve
the desired goal (a woman).
154 • Christopher Craig Brittain