The use for Rusch’s ratio is”how important is it for biologists to study this particular payoff structure”? Your suggested revised ratio wouldn’t be good for that.
It might be good for something else—rationality training? But that’s a different subject. I suspect that, even in that context, the PD is overemphasized, and other structures relatively neglected.
It’s important to be aware of the “boring” and “stupid” payoff structures, even if their solutions are obvious. Especially when the organism can’t infallibly tell which game situation it’s in.
Every day we deal with a thousand ‘games’ that are really uninteresting because the payoff matrix is so lopsided that we don’t even think about it.
If we take those situations out of the denominator, what does the fraction look like?
In the context of evolutionary psychology, taking those situations out of the denominator might be a bad idea, leading to biased thinking.
How? When do you actually reason with this ratio, actually?
The use for Rusch’s ratio is”how important is it for biologists to study this particular payoff structure”? Your suggested revised ratio wouldn’t be good for that.
It might be good for something else—rationality training? But that’s a different subject. I suspect that, even in that context, the PD is overemphasized, and other structures relatively neglected.
Is it important for biologists to study the payoff structures like ‘stab yourself in the eye’ or ‘get into a fight you can’t win’?
It’s important to be aware of the “boring” and “stupid” payoff structures, even if their solutions are obvious. Especially when the organism can’t infallibly tell which game situation it’s in.