In real life, we often encounter a situation where we do something and the other person might respond in a variety of ways. Sometimes, it’s the other way around; the other party might engage us in multiple ways and we end up trying to prepare for each action that they might take.

This large space of possibilities makes things more unpredictable.

What we often forget is that we can narrow this space down.

For example, we can make an option undesirable to the other party by increasing the cost to take it or by decreasing the benefit to take it. This is called manipulating the incentive structure. And while this doesn’t prevent the other party from taking an option, it will limit the effect of the act.

We can also use deception to influence the other party against or towards some options. This is risky because the other party might find out the truth.

On a lighter note, we can educate the other party so that they don’t make some decisions that will not benefit them. Yet, they might not listen to you.

We can introduce a ban for doing specific actions. But this must be enforced with a clear punishment by a strong authority figure.

The more we can restrict the space of possibilities the more predictable things become.

Of course, in reality, it’s often impossible to reduce the possibility into only one action (the other party can only take a single action) thereby making things very predictable. This often happens in chess but real life is messier than chess.

And often, too much restriction is suffocating to the other party thereby making them unwilling to play with you. Too much predictability can also be boring. And sometimes, restricting some choices can cause you to sin against the free will of conscious beings. So, be careful when you try to cut off possibilities.