A normative theory must exploit labels, not expunge them

Evidence

It should particularly be noted that to assert the influence of “labels” (that is, of the symbolic and connotative details of the game) and the dependence of the theory on empirical evidence does not involve the question of whether game theory is predictive or normative—concerned with generalizations about actual choice or the strategy of correct choice. The assertion here is not that people simply are affected by symbolic details but that they should be for the purpose of correct play. A normative theory must produce strategies that are at least as good as what people can do without them. More, it must not deny or expunge details of the game that can demonstrably benefit two or more players and that the players, consequently, should not expunge or ignore in their mutual interest. — Thomas C. Schelling, The Strategy of Conflict, 231

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies that the labeling claim is normative (correct play), not just descriptive — theory must not ignore symbolic details that benefit players.
• XREF: connects to: Identities are reinforced by outsider-given labels; Society provides the categories of thought, not the content of taxonomies; Polemical labels gain no theoretical validity by being deployed earnestly — Aijaz Ahmad, In Theory: Classes, Nations, Literatures, 374 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Identities are reinforced by outsider-given labels #expands (0.78)
• Society provides the categories of thought, not the content of taxonomies #corroborates (0.75)