Observation: game theory is not uniquely human, and does not inherently cater to important human values.
Immediate consequence: game theory, taken to extremes already found in human history, is inhuman.
Immediate consequence the second: Austrian school economics, in its reliance on allowing markets to come to equilibrium on their own, is inhuman.
Conjecture: if you attempt to optimize by taking your own use of game theory and similar arts to similar extremes, you will become a monster of a similar type.
Observation: a refusal to use game theory in considerations results in a strictly worse life than otherwise, and possibly its use more often, more intensely, and with less puny human mercy will result in a better life for you alone.
Conjecture: this really, really looks like the scary and horrifying spawn of a Red Queen race, defecting on PD, and being a jerk in the style of Cthulhu.
Thoughts?
Continue laying siege to me; I'm done here.
What you're referring to is a problem I've been thinking about and chipping away at for some time; I've even had some discussions about it here and people have generally been receptive. Maybe the reason you're being downvoted is that you're using the word 'human' to mean 'good'.
The core issue is that humans have empathy, and by this we mean that other people's utility function matters to us. More concisely, our perception of other people's utility forms a part of our utility which is conditionally independent of the direct benefits to us.
Our empathy not on...
If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.