Download - Ontology of Poker
![Page 1: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The Ontology of Poker
Barry Smithwith thanks to Ingvar Johansson and John Kearns
Revised version of slides from talk presented in Buffalo on March 14, 2014
![Page 2: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
We start with John Searle’s ontology of social reality (version of 1995)
2
![Page 3: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
This is a president
3
![Page 4: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
This is a cathedral
4
![Page 5: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
This is a driver’s license
5
![Page 6: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Searle’s Ontology
x counts as y in context C
This human being counts as a president This stone edifice counts as a cathedralThis piece of paper counts as a driver’s license
x is physical, y is social / institutional / deontic
6
![Page 7: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Problem for this Theorymoney in bank accounts, debts, rights, prices, permissions, …
Here there is no (physical) x term “Free-standing y terms” (quasi-abstract entities)
In olden times; such y terms exist because there are memories in people’s headsNow, often: the y terms exist because there are physical artifacts (above all: documents) which record / represent their existence
A new ontology of social reality based on the role of document acts and recording devices
7
![Page 8: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
![Page 9: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Document actsmany kinds of human action involve documents Signing a will in front of witnesses allows the creation of an estate, showing a passport at a border post allows a legal entry into a new country, …
9
![Page 10: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Surely document acts are just speech acts
Speech act is, after all, translated into French as acte du langageAustin and Searle do indeed comment that speech acts can be
performed in writingBut if we examine the contents of standard texts on speech act
theory we do not find sections on:
and so forth
10
registering documentsserving documentssigning documents
amending documentsauthenticating documentsdestroying documents
![Page 11: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Perhaps can support the Dispensability of Documents
Thesisdocuments are involved only inessentially in
acts of, for instance, making a will or legally entering a foreign country:
in sufficiently small village communities wills would not be needed
in sufficiently small countries passports would not be needed
11
![Page 12: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
![Page 13: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
![Page 14: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Hypothesis (against the Dispensability thesis)
Even in small societies of friendly individuals who know each other, share memories, accept the same rules, and do not cheat
there are human activities which essentially involve the use of documents or equivalent physical supports / recording devices
We shall argue that poker is one such activity14
![Page 15: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Strategy
1. A very short ontology of war2. A very short ontology of chess3. The special case of blind chess4. Poker
15
![Page 16: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
WAR
16
![Page 17: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
WAR – 1 levelthoughts
17
![Page 18: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
WAR – 2 levelsthoughts
18
speech acts
![Page 19: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
WAR – 2 levelsthoughts
19
speech acts
thoughts
![Page 20: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
WAR – 2 levels
events on the ground
speech acts
speech acts
20
thoughts
thoughts
![Page 21: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
WAR – 2 levels
events on the ground
speech acts
speech acts
21
thoughts
thoughts
![Page 22: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
WAR – 3 levels
events on the ground
speech acts
speech acts
22
thoughtsthoughts
![Page 23: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
War is essentially a three-leveled affair:thoughts, speech acts and physical actions
23
Searle: chess is war in attenuated form
![Page 24: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
A Game of Chess
physical movementsof physical pieces of wood
24
![Page 25: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
A Game of Chess
movementsof physical pieces
thoughts
25
![Page 26: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
A Game of Chess
physical movementsof physical pieces of wood
thoughtsthoughts
arm acts arm acts
26
![Page 27: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
What is the Game?
physical movementsof physical pieces of wood
27
![Page 28: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
A Game of Blind Chess
28
![Page 29: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Chess is played
in small societies of friendly individuals who know each other, share memories, accept the same rules, and do not cheat
chess does not essentially involve anything beyond thoughts and speech acts (and memory)
29
![Page 30: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
But what is here the game
?
30
![Page 31: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
But what is here the game
?
thoughtsthoughts
speech acts speech acts31
![Page 32: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Is the game just a sequence of speech acts?
Neither thoughts nor utterances are parts of the game
speech acts merely represent the movements of the pieces
But here there are here no movements and no pieces
32
![Page 33: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
The game is something abstract but historical
Normal chess is a set of physical movements which count as a game of chess.
Blind chess is a free standing y eventIt is a sequence of board-constellations (as
represented in chess notation). It is a historical sequence (the game was played by specific parties, and it came into existence through a certain series of actions on their part) but in and of itself it has only the sorts of quasi-mathematical properties which are possessed by debts or prices
33
![Page 34: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Game of blind chess: a free-standing y-event
thoughtsthoughts
speech acts
speech acts34
an abstract pattern tied to specific parties and to a specific series of events
![Page 35: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
A debt: a free-standing y-quality
an abstract pattern tied to specific parties and to a specific initiating event
records records
thoughts,worries
thoughts
35
![Page 36: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
Blind chess game = free-standing y event
Note that a similar ontological assay could not be applied in the case of war
There could be no such thing as blind war?Why not? (Perhaps in the future war on the internet, à la Stuxnet,
bitcoin, will become possible …)
36
![Page 37: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
Hypothesis (against the Dispensability thesis)
There can be no such thing as blind poker (= poker played entirely via speech acts)
37
![Page 38: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
38
![Page 39: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
We are here interested in live poker
‘live poker’: A retronym for poker played with at a table with cards, as opposed to video poker or online poker.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_poker_terms
39
![Page 40: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
Two senses of ‘blind’
1. You can’t see the (poker) faces2. You can’t see the cards
40
![Page 41: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
41
![Page 42: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
42
![Page 43: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
43
http://www.pokeronlineformoney.org/online-poker-sites/
![Page 44: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Two senses of ‘blind’
1. You can’t see the (poker) faces• We assume in what follows that faces are
visible (and that reading faces is an essential part of normal poker)
2. You can’t see the cards
44
![Page 45: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
Two senses of ‘blind’
1. You can’t see the (poker) faces2. You can’t see the cards
• because there are no cards (not even digital images of cards ), and there are no chips – just thoughts, speech acts, and memories
45
![Page 46: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
Why not a game of blind poker?The problem is not memory: Really good poker players have phenomenal memories for the cards that have been dealt, and for the bets that have been laid.The first problem is this:“The object of poker is to make money. That’s the way the game is scored.”D. Sklansky, The Theory of Poker, 1999You don’t play poker with your children for fun
46
![Page 47: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
Could there be a game of poker in a small village barter economy?
No chips, no tokens, no dollar bills, no IOU notes
We would need a dealer whom everyone trusts. Each player commits one cow to the game, communicating his commitment to the dealer who holds the cow in (documentless) escrow.
Bets are denominated in 1/1000s of a cow. …47
![Page 48: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
The problem, rather, is one of secrecy vs. openness
in poker (in contrast to chess) not everything is in the open. Cards have a face and a backChess in contrast is a perfect information game: chess pieces only have a faceSurely, we might say, games requiring partial exposure and partial concealment can't be blind
48
![Page 49: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
The dealer would have to be dealing blind
We would need a dealer outside the game who is able to communicate secretly with the players what the cards are in their respective hands. The dealer, too, would need to have a phenomenal memory – he would need to know what cards all the players have, and what bets they have laid, at every stage of the game.
49
![Page 50: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Further problems
The dealer would need communicate secretly to the players e.g. via audio signals transmitted through earplugs
But sometimes the players would need to communicate secretly with the dealer
To do this, they would need to leave the room e.g. to inform the dealer about cards they want to throw into the muck (when there are physical cards, this just involves laying the cards face down onto the discard pile)
50
![Page 51: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
In chess, people cannot cheatWe are assuming that, in normal poker, people also do not cheat. But there is still a difference – in chess everything is open to the players involved. In poker, only some things are open, and this allows bluffing (both via sizes of bets placed and via body language). Knowing how to bluff and how to detect bluffing are skills that are essential to good play.
Bluffing is not a form of cheating
51
![Page 52: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Poker involves essential randomness
Cards are essential to poker in a way in which chess pieces are not essential to chessbecause poker essentially involves chance: shuffling the cards serves to create essential randomnessIf cards were dispensed with, the dealer would need a randomness generator when assigning card labels to successive players
52
![Page 53: Ontology of Poker](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022062311/543430568d7f727c448b49e5/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Even if players and dealers had perfect memories,
there would still have to be something like a recording (documentation) of these labels in the CPU of the machine(this not [only] to prevent cheating, but simply in order to allow generation of the card labels)the information of what cards have already been dealt has to be stored in the randomness generator so that new card labels can be generated from those which would remain in the deck– this is a defeat for the Dispensability thesis
53