Integrating the Mentally Ill is a Nash Equilibrium
In the article written by Lorenzo Canonico, the author goes on to explain how “human insanity” is what pushes us as a civilization and is the source of our genius. And yet, we as a society tend to marginalize those who are different. John Nash was labeled “insane” due to his schizophrenia, he was marginalized because he didn’t fit the norm; mental illness has a negative stigma attached to it. Using game theory, and more specifically the segregation game, Canonico explains why it is difficult to change the status quo and instead opt for segregation rather than integration, even if both are Nash Equilibria and integration offers the higher payoff. In a population that has been historically segregated, any experiment to try and change away from the status quo would result in worse payoffs, so this would reinforce the idea that segregation is the better option. It is only when the entire population systematically and cohesively agrees to integrate that they end up at the NE of full integration. But such coordination is incredulously difficult.
“In essence, in a world where segregation has always been the status quo, a prophetic voice encouraging us to integrate would be seen a threat to the stable configuration the society has grown accustomed to, and even the supporters would not stand by the prophet as they dismiss the vision as impractical and unachievable.” -Canonico.
Trying to incorporate this message to student life at Cornell, I’ve been thinking a lot about the systems we have in place already. The resources that we have set up, what are their intended purpose? To adequately integrate the mentally ill into society, everyone must agree and accept. Without this cohesion, we are left with a less optimal outcome. Are the mentally ill still marginalized? CAPS, EARS, and all of the other resources at Cornell, are these resources actually handicaps that bar the people who use them from future success? I would hate to think so, but who’s to say? Anyone can say that they support combatting mental illness, but simply saying is not doing and believing. Even without knowing game theory, I think people can understand that supporting those in need is probably good for society, but we struggle to understand just how much good, and how much of a personal impact these actions might have. And of course, we tend to look after ourselves first, then others. When thinking about the conversation I overhead a couple days ago, it seems like some students view mental illnesses are handicaps, especially when it comes to recruitment. Some people are believe that not having a mental illness makes them a stronger candidate. I don’t know how common these thoughts are at Cornell, but it seems like we have yet to reach the socially optimal NE of full integration. Which means we as a community are not doing the best we can. After all, it’s our insanity that drives our genius, and we are stunting our own growth by marginalizing the insane.
https://medium.com/@lorenzobarberiscanonico/going-on-strike-against-reality-game-theory-and-mental-illness-10477bdc1b0f