A pair of lovers are like a pair of prisoners, imprisoned in a cage woven with love, playing the game of love in the cage. Whoever wins or loses often depends not on the depth of love, but on the quality of the game.

A lover is not only your partner, but also your opponent and even your enemy. In this less fun love "game", whoever can master the game or the rules of the game skillfully is the winner of love. Therefore, if you want to be a winner, you must learn to cooperate with your lover like a partner and deal with your lover like an enemy. In the face of your opponent's love encirclement and suppression, you should learn many anti-encirclement measures. I really can't do it. I'll come in 36 minutes: sorry, I won't "play" with you!

Almost all game theory books begin with the classic prisoner's dilemma. Although we are talking about a pair of arsonists, the principle also applies to "indulgent criminals". Love is a big fire.

Let's look at the criminal who set the fire. The case of "Prisoner's Dilemma" cannot but be cited here, although it is well known. It should be noted that the version of the case is different, but the reason is the same.

After a fire, two suspects A and B were imprisoned in two separate rooms that could not communicate with each other. If both of them admit it, they will be detained for 8 years each; If one person admits that another person does not admit it, admits to letting it go and gets a reward, the person who does not admit it will be detained for 10 years and fined; If neither of them admits it, and the evidence is insufficient, they will be detained 1 year.

We see that if A chooses to admit, B had better choose to admit, otherwise it will be severely punished. If A chooses to deny it, B had better choose to admit it, because it can not only be released, but also get a bonus. In other words, no matter what attitude A has, B's best choice is to admit it. Conversely, similarly, regardless of B's attitude, A's best choice is recognition. As a result, both people will choose to admit it.

This is the famous "prisoner's dilemma", which reflects the contradictory rationality of individual rationality and collective rationality. Whoever chooses to deny it may be in big trouble, while the other party enjoys it and gains something. So, there is a paradox. Sometimes, loyalty to a partner will drive you to the wall, unless both sides can achieve 100% loyalty, but this is impossible. Who can not be tempted in the face of huge interests?

People in love are also similar to walking into the prisoner's dilemma. If both sides don't change their minds, that's the best game. In heaven, I want to be a lovebird, grow together on the earth, two branches of a tree ... If everyone changes their minds, the effect is not bad, you go your way, I will cross my single-plank bridge; If one party changes his mind and finds a better lover, while the other party remains faithful, then the one who finds a new lover is the happiest, which is happier than the result of two people not changing their minds, because he has found a better lover, and the abandoned one is the most unfortunate, which is even more unfortunate than the result of two people changing their minds, because the pressure he bears comes from both the happiness of the other party and his own unhappiness.

According to the analysis of the prisoner's dilemma, the most proud choice of lovers is to find another new love, the most naive choice is to grow old together, the most rational choice is to part ways, and the worst choice is to be mercilessly abandoned by the other party with another new love. The problem is that the most proud ending is too immoral, the most naive ending is too illusory, the most rational ending is too cruel and the worst ending is too painful. Of course, the most important reminder of the prisoner's dilemma model to lovers is that in coping strategies, it is best to guard against each other strictly, just as one prisoner guards against another.

However, most lovers in the anti-custom reality hope to live forever, and no one wants to go back to the shore, even if they are abandoned by each other. Why is this happening?

Because there is a significant difference between lovers who love each other in the game and prisoners who set them on fire. After the prisoner was caught by the police, he was quarantined for inspection, so it was impossible to form an industrial defense alliance. Even if a deal can be made, who can guarantee that they or the other party will never default?

Attention! This is a very important condition of the prisoner's dilemma model, which is often ignored by some economists.

Contrary to the important condition of prisoners, lovers caught by the goddess of love are generally not isolated and "censored", but stay together all day. What are you doing together? In addition to swearing, swearing!

The most swearing period in life is probably the period of love. What do you swear? Nothing more than you don't marry, you don't marry, you are the wind, I am the oath of sand, and there is only one purpose, that is, to let the other party believe that they can grow old forever. They hope to be loyal to each other and get a good game result.

Moreover, in order to prevent each other from changing their minds, we should always try to convince each other that you are lucky to meet me, and I will never be destroyed when I meet you. However, nothing in the world is eternal. Many love tragedies often begin with breaking vows. It seems that there is no love without vows in the world.

This is the game situation of lovers who are together all day. For lovers living far apart, they are like isolated prisoners, but instead of being locked in two cells, they know where to go. According to the principle of the game, they have no better choice but to break their vows. If they want to be winners in love, they'd better not keep the promise of love, so as to get out of the "prisoner's dilemma".

However, this conclusion is problematic in practice. Because it is not uncommon for people to fall in love successfully in life, and it is not uncommon for people to be together all their lives. I can't say I'm reluctant. In fact, some of them do live happily.

I believe that the love life of most couples is ok. So, what mechanism enables them to keep their vows?

I've been thinking about this question, but according to the idea of game theory, the answer I get every time seems to be inextricably linked with morality and ethics. Later, I happened to see an experiment, and suddenly I felt that the peak turned to the forest and the mountain was clear.

It turns out that the happy love life in reality can also be found in game theory. Thanks to Robert axelrod of the University of Michigan. He organized an experiment in the computer competition. The idea of the competition is simple: anyone who wants to take part in this computer competition will play the role of a prisoner in the prisoner's dilemma case. They began to play the game of prisoner's dilemma, and everyone had to choose between cooperation and betrayal. The key is that they don't just play the game once, but play it 200 times over and over again.

This is the so-called "repeated prisoner's dilemma", so it reflects the daily interpersonal relationship more truly. This is another noteworthy situation. The simplest prisoner's dilemma model is a one-off game, which intensifies the prisoner's determination to confess. Just like a pair of men and women who don't know each other, they occasionally meet on a tour, then have a spring dream in a hotel and leave the next day. No one will be loyal to anyone and will not be unhappy about each other's future disloyalty. The reason is that this is a one-time game (one-time "game" and "sex game"). But if men and women know each other, they will meet frequently in the future, and their loyalty to each other will be improved to varying degrees, because they still have the opportunity to repeat the game.

Axelrod was greatly surprised by the result of the experiment, because the strategy adopted by the winner of the competition was not profound at all, but very simple: answer blows with blows. China people call it "deal with a man as he deals with you".

To put it bluntly, the so-called "tit for tat" strategy is the principle of carrot and stick. It insists on not betraying each other first, so it is "kind". It will reward the cooperation before the next round (even if the opponent has betrayed before). In this sense, it is "tolerant". But it will take treacherous actions to punish its opponents for their previous betrayal. In this sense, it is "tough". As the saying goes, "If people don't commit crimes against me, I won't commit crimes; If people attack me, I will. " Moreover, its strategy is extremely simple, and opponents can know its intention at a glance. In this sense, it is "simple and clear".

Later, axelrod invited more people to participate in the competition. As a result, experiments were carried out, and the winner of each tit-for-tat contest won the championship.

The competition shows that people with the following characteristics will always win: 1. Goodwill; 2. Tolerance; 3. tenacity; 4. Simple and clear.

Let's talk about love.

The process of love is generally a process of repeated games, so lovers have countless opportunities to "deal with a man as he deals with you." So, who will be the winner in this repeated game? Who will win the game?

According to Robert axelrod's experiment, victory always belongs to a kind, tolerant, tenacious and simple lover. On the contrary, malicious, sharp, weak and complicated lovers often lose.

Therefore, the game principle of getting happy love should be:

First, treat lovers with kindness rather than malice. This truth is very simple, needless to say.

Second, treat lovers with tolerance rather than meanness. Happy lovers are not necessarily faithful, and certainly not fickle. The key to their happy life is to tolerate each other, not only their shortcomings, but also their occasional derailment. And those who are harsh on their lovers, those who are always unwilling to indulge their occasional infidelity, are often unhappy.

Third, be tough on lovers, not weak. On the premise that I will always love you kindly, I will treat you with love and hate, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, and deal with a man as he deals with you. Of course, there must be limits and discretion. For example, be extremely sensitive to the intimate behavior between lovers and other members of the opposite sex, and be sure to reciprocate. Of course, every time you lose your temper, there is a limit. You must tolerate each other.

Fourth, treat lovers simply and clearly, not around mountains and waters. Axelrod's experiment proves that in the process of game, too complicated strategies make opponents difficult to understand and feel at a loss, so it is difficult to establish a stable cooperative relationship. In fact, in a non-zero-sum environment, "smart, strict", "all is fair in war" and "playing dumb and pretending to understand" are often not the best policies. On the contrary, clear personality, concise style and frank attitude are the keys to success. Let your lover know what you are talking about, and don't let the other person guess and cause misunderstanding. There are many love tragedies that break up because there is no simple and clear treatment for lovers, which eventually leads to misunderstanding. Therefore, the means of love is best to be simple, so that lovers can see at a glance, saving a lot of time for guessing. As for the rest of the time, haha, you can swear to God with it!

We should have been wary of the simple game mode in which lovers can win in love. Because of endless love vows and the grasp and application of the principles of kindness, tolerance, tenacity and simplicity, there are many beautiful love and happy marriages in the world.

However, I think the highest game realm should be to forget the game, forget many game principles such as kindness, tolerance, tenacity and simplicity, and enter the realm of forgetting.

I remember waiting for 16 years. Yang Guo jumped into the cold pool because he couldn't wait for the girl. Finally, after meeting the little dragon girl again, he said with deep feelings: "We know that a person still has feelings!" " . Yes, people, it is better to be affectionate.