![Transcription Center logo](/themes/custom/tc_theme/assets/image/logo.png)
This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.
56 [[upper right margin]] zero sum gene (IFS gain you lose - would a fixed pie) of these roles as system [[strikethrough]] beca [[/strikethrough]] becomes bigger less involtute - if I walk into restaurant in NY + order coffee, my only relation to waiter is customer-client; waiter can't say, "If you don't pay for this coffee I won't help you build your canoo next mo." perception of joint benefit declines + becomes more of a zero same game (If I leave w/ out paying for coffee, I gain 50 cents + you lose 50 cents) ultimately not, since cafe may go broke + I can't drink coffee there non-zero sum game is I am not seeking maximum short-term profit + willing to take less for long-term relationship thus, acc. to Alice, still maximizing, but taking the longer view (hence a criticism of substantivists who say not maximizing) Alice sees that moral rules are a kind of maximizing - do unto other as you would have them do unto you brings long-term benefits 57 to play a non-zero sum game is very short-sighted in a small society probably higher [[strikethrough]] in [[/strikethrough]] tolerance for imbalance in [[strikethrough]] embedded [[/strikethrough]] involuted relations will stick w/ a bad marriage longer than would stick w/ a bad job