Talk:Zero-sum thinking

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Zero-sum thinking article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Psychology

	Psychology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PsychologyWikipedia:WikiProject PsychologyTemplate:WikiProject Psychologypsychology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Game theory

	This article is part of WikiProject Game theory, an attempt to improve, grow, and standardize Wikipedia's articles related to Game theory. We need your help! Join in \| Fix a red link \| Add content \| Weigh inGame theoryWikipedia:WikiProject Game theoryTemplate:WikiProject Game theorygame theory articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

expanding see also[edit]

i wish to see also expand to include digital created art tokens like Nfts and or digital token currencies — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.34.77.189 (talk) 16:16, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Free Market as important example of positive sum game[edit]

In a system where every property transfer is voluntary, the transfer must provide a gain for every involved party, because otherwise that party would not do such a voluntary transfer. Hence such a system is always positive sum. This is a basic example of how free markets are not zero-sum contrary to common believe. 2A01:598:8881:82E7:9741:BEFA:63BB:7786 (talk) 21:39, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems incoherent to me. People can absolutely act against their own interests I.E. voluntarily trade but not receive a gain (it’s called a scam) 2001:56A:FCFE:E200:D49A:E69:8694:B2E5 (talk) 15:44, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Zero Sum as a “Cognitive Bias”[edit]

It seems to me proving that Zero Sum Thinking constitutes a cognitive bias would also necessitate proving that, in fact, life itself is not Zero Sum. Can we be sure, as this article seems to imply, that the universe contains an infinite amount of matter/goods? How can we verify any situation that we perceive NOT to be Zero Sum indeed actually ISNT. 2001:56A:FCFE:E200:D49A:E69:8694:B2E5 (talk) 15:42, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence Evaluation as an example of Zero-Sum Thinking[edit]

In 2001, a man was convicted of murder because of a single particle of gunshot residue was found on his jacket. While the defense said that the gunshot residue could have came from improper police handling of the evidence, this did not sway the jury to give the man a not guilty verdict. The man turned out to be innocent, but the case showed that when evidence is not definitive, it can lead to wrong conclusions. The question posed should have been did the man commit the crime or not, but the evidence made the question be did the man commit the crime, or did the police mishandle evidence.^[1]

[1]https://journals-sagepub-com.argo.library.okstate.edu/doi/pdf/10.1177/0956797618818484 QuillanTaylor (talk) 21:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Pilditch, Toby D.; Fenton, Norman; Lagnado, David (2019-02). "The Zero-Sum Fallacy in Evidence Evaluation". Psychological Science. 30 (2): 250–260. doi:10.1177/0956797618818484. ISSN 0956-7976. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

[1] Pilditch, Toby D.; Fenton, Norman; Lagnado, David (2019-02). "The Zero-Sum Fallacy in Evidence Evaluation". Psychological Science. 30 (2): 250–260. doi:10.1177/0956797618818484. ISSN 0956-7976. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)

[1]