[Column] Traps of Thought: (4) The Trap of Confusing Objectives — The 'Labyrinth of Hierarchies' Surrounding Strategy and Tactics

The main purpose of the entire series: Human thinking is prone to falling into various 'traps' when dealing with a complex world. Intuition often arbitrarily leaps across, mixes, mystifies, or simplifies the hierarchies of expert discussion—this series dissects these typical patterns one by one using concrete examples. Ultimately, it aims to reveal the common psychological impulses behind them and provide clues for readers to reflect more carefully on their own thought processes.

Summary of this article: When explaining modern social interactions using game theory, confusing the strategic level (long-term, fixed) with the tactical level (short-term, fluid) leads to confusion in discussion. This article uses Masahiro Okuno's 'Game Theory of Spontaneous Relational Society' to reveal this 'trap of hierarchical structure' and proposes a perspective that distinguishes between the two to more accurately grasp modern spontaneous relationships. This is a typical example of thinking that ignores hierarchies, alongside the confusion of scale and mystification discussed previously.

Where does the discussion surrounding game theory become confused?

When discussing modern social interactions, many arguments proceed while confusing the 'strategic level' and the 'tactical level.' This 'trap of hierarchical structure' is the greatest factor in the confusion of thought, and it becomes clearly visible when using Masahiro Okuno's 'Game Theory of Spontaneous Relational Society' as source material.

It is not that Okuno's argument itself is bad. In fact, the perspective of 'spontaneous relationships' that Okuno presents is important. However, when a 'lack of awareness of hierarchical structure' is added to it, the points of discussion suddenly become ambiguous, leading to an overemphasis on the 'novelty of modern society' or the misunderstanding that 'traditional game theory no longer applies.'

1. Arguments in Masahiro Okuno's 'Game Theory of Spontaneous Relational Society'

Masahiro Okuno's book 'Game Theory of Spontaneous Relational Society' aims to rethink the 'fixed and purposeful' premises of traditional game theory. Traditional game theory is a model where relationships between players are clearly defined, fixed, and strategies are chosen with the goal of maximizing long-term gains, which is effective for analyzing inter-state negotiations or inter-corporate contracts. However, it cannot fully handle the diversity and fluidity of spontaneous relationships in modern society.

Okuno focuses on the following two points as characteristics of modern society.

1. Fluidity of relationships:
   Who one interacts with is not fixed, and in some cases, relationships naturally fade away.

2. Non-fixity of objectives:
   Interactions do not necessarily aim for long-term gain maximization or consensus building, and accidental or local interactions occur.

Okuno points out that because of these factors, spontaneous relationships that are difficult to handle with traditional game theory arise, necessitating theoretical expansion.

2. The problem of confusing the strategic level and the tactical level

In traditional game theory, the opponent was clearly defined. For example, in the case of inter-state negotiations, two parties such as Japan and the United States are defined as fixed players, and their respective strategies are designed based on objectives such as long-term gain maximization or trust building.

When this is applied to modern society, the situation for interactions on the internet is significantly different. In interactions with anonymous users across a screen, the subject is ambiguous, and the traditional fixed and purposeful premises seem to no longer apply. Here, Okuno focuses on the fluidity of spontaneous relationships and attempts to theorize new patterns of interaction that cannot be explained by traditional frameworks.

However, this is where the 'trap of hierarchical structure' occurs.

The point is that the essential strategic player is not the individual anonymous user, but rather the platform itself. Strategic goals such as establishing a presence on a platform or maintaining a reputation correspond to decision-making at a long-term and fixed strategic level. At this level, it is essentially no different from the framework of traditional game theory.

On the other hand, interactions with individual anonymous users are merely tactical, local interactions. At this level, the opponent is fluid, and relationships may be non-purposeful or fade away in the short term. Okuno's argument...

• Strategic level (platform)

• Tactical level (anonymous users)

does not sufficiently clarify this distinction, and there is an impression that he treats both together. This is precisely the 'trap of hierarchical structure' and the core of the theoretical confusion.

3. Reformulating the essential problem awareness

In Okuno's argument, changes in the environment (fixed to fluid, purposeful to non-purposeful) are treated centrally.
However, the essence of spontaneous relationships in modern society is not just that. Rather, the core of the problem might lie in...the 'lack of tactical nature' in traditional game theory.

• Strategic level decision-making:
  Fixed and purposeful decision-making, such as establishing a presence or maintaining a reputation on a platform, can be sufficiently explained by traditional theory.

• Tactical level decision-making:
  Accidental and local interactions with individual anonymous users can occur even in the absence of a strategy. Tactical-level behavioral patterns are multi-layered, non-linear, and have the potential to increase exponentially.

The trap of hierarchical structure rears its head here as well.
While Okuno focuses on the diversity at the tactical level, he fails to establish the "relationship with the strategic level," which causes the points of discussion to become scattered.

4. An Expanded Perspective on Game Theory in Modern Society

If the hierarchical structure is organized, the problem will become clear.

1. Strategic Level (Platform):
   Fixed and goal-oriented. Can be explained by conventional game theory.

2. Tactical Level (Individual Anonymous Users):
   Fluid and non-goal-oriented. Theorization of tactical patterns is necessary.

3. Strategy Present/Absent × Diversity of Tactical Patterns:
   This combination increases exponentially, creating the complexity of modern society.

Okuno focuses on this tactical interaction, but because he does not explicitly state the hierarchical structure (strategy and tactics), the discussion remains unorganized.
This is precisely the "trap of hierarchical structure" that is the subject of this article.

5. Conclusion

Masahiro Okuno's attempt is important.
However, to understand modern society, we should consider that the greatest trap is not the "fluidization of the environment," but rather the "confusion of hierarchical structures."

Only by explicitly stating the hierarchical structure of the strategic and tactical levels, and by theorizing including the diversity of tactical interactions and cases where strategy is absent, can we accurately grasp the complexity of spontaneous relationships.

If you overlook the hierarchical structure, the discussion will get lost.
The exit to the labyrinth does not always appear as a door, but rather as a staircase.

See also: