The analytical approach of using game theory to model and understand the strategic decisions of historical actors—kings, generals, diplomats, revolutionaries. It asks: given their information, incentives, and the likely actions of their rivals, was going to war, signing a treaty, or betraying an ally a “rational” move? This doesn’t reduce history to math, but provides a sharp lens to cut through narrative and see the cold, strategic calculus behind pivotal moments.
Example: “A historical game theory analysis of the Cuban Missile Crisis frames it not as a moral showdown, but as a brutal game of ‘Chicken’ between Kennedy and Khrushchev. Each move—the blockade, the secret deal to remove missiles from Turkey—was a strategic play to force the other to swerve (back down) without triggering mutual annihilation. It shows how they rationally danced on the edge of an irrational abyss.”
by Abzunammu February 2, 2026
Get the Historical Game Theory mug.The fallacy of judging past societies, actions, or norms by the standards of the present, or conversely, of justifying outdated, harmful practices by arguing "that was normal at the time." In its dismissive form, it's used to invalidate modern moral critiques of historical figures by claiming a lack of historical context. More perniciously, it's used to defend the persistence of antiquated injustices by appealing to their historical commonality.
Example: Defending a founding father's slaveholding by saying, "It was normal then, you can't judge him," commits the Historical Normality Bias. It uses historical descriptivism ("it was common") to avoid moral judgment, implying that collective moral failure excuses individual participation in atrocity.
by Dumu The Void February 4, 2026
Get the Historical Normality Bias mug.