1

Zero-Sum and Non-Zero-Sum Games

Name:

Institution:
 2

Zero-Sum and Non-Zero-Sum Games

Game theory is a branch of applied mathematics which analyzes a situation in which
participants have conflicting interests where the only objective is to win (Von Neumann and
Morgenstern, 1980). It can be applied to a wide range of situations in which choices affect the
outcomes. It was developed based on for whatever circumstance, there exists a strategy that
allows one party to win. In order for this theory to apply, some assumptions must be made,
that each player is rational and acting in self-interest. Any business can be considered as a
game played against competitors or customers. These games are classified into two
categories, zero-sum games and non-zero-sum games.
Zero-sum game, also known as strictly competitive game, is a theory game where one
person’s gain equals to another person’s loss, so the net benefit is zero. It can also be said that
one person can only gain or win something when another person to loses it. Therefore, zero
sum game can be said to be a win-lose situation (Ashram, 1995). An example of such zero-
sum games is poker, chess and gambling where one party wins while the other loses.
In contrast, non-zero-sum game is a situation where the total gains and loses of the interacting
parties is less than or more than zero. This means that there is a net benefit or net loss on the
outcome of the situation. This game can either be competitive or non-competitive (Davis,
2012). An example is a contest between a pirate ship and a trade ship where a win for the
pirates means a gain for resources, wealth and prisoners while a win for the trade ship means
defeat of the challenges by the pirates.
Non-zero-sum games therefore better represents the dynamics of the world we live in. It
differs from zero-sum games in that there is no universally accepted solution or predictable
outcome. Participants in non-zero-sum games have some complementary interests and
completely opposed interests.
According to Carol Gilligan’s theory of moral development, women have different
psychological and moral tendencies than men. Her theory was based against women but
towards men. Women think in terms of caring and relationships while men think in terms of
rules and justice. She emphasized the need to value both men and women equally. Women
hesitate to judge due to their view on relationships complexity. Girls and boys had different
moral development and ethical concerns. For girls, entering adolescent meant sacrificing self
and genuine voice for urgent need for relationship, thus developing a female ethics of care is
more complex and conflicted than in males.
In conclusion, Gilligan points out that both systems are morally valid, hence she does not
give credit to one system over the other. By integrating justice for males and care and
responsibility for females, both genders will realize full human potential. She focused on both
care-based and justice-based morality. Care-based morality is based on acting justly by
avoiding violence and helping the needy, interconnectedness and universality. On the other
hand, justice-based morality is based on acting justly by avoiding inequality and views the
world as composed of autonomous individual interacting with one another. Those with
justice-based morality (males) tend to see any dilemma as a conflict between different claims
while care-based individuals see each other as already in a difficulty situation. If there is any
conflict, the point is not to decide the conflict one way or the other but to find a way to
remove it.
 3

References
Arsham H., Stability of essential strategy in two-person zero-sum games, Congressus
Numerantium, 110(3), 167-180. 1995.
Davis, M. (2012). Game Theory (1st ed., p. 5). New York: Dover Publications.
Von Neumann, J. & Morgenstern, O. (1980). Theory of Games and Economic Behavior.
Princeton, Princeton University Press.