Concepts
The irreducible epistemic atoms underlying the curriculum. 4,828 atoms across 8 types
Externalize your reading of someone's reasoning and verify…
Before assuming you understand someone's reasoning, externalize your reading of their underlying schema and verify it directly rather than debating conclusions that may stem from invisible schema divergence.
Convert 'I am X' identity claims into 'In situation Y, I…
Rewrite personal identity schemas as behavioral predictions with specified conditions and thresholds to convert unfalsifiable identity claims into testable hypotheses.
Schema revisions must generate new predictions, not just…
When adjusting a schema after disconfirming evidence, require the adjustment to generate new testable predictions rather than merely explaining away the original failure.
Edge cases that break your schema reveal boundary…
When an edge case breaks your schema, extract the implicit boundary condition that the edge case revealed rather than dismissing the edge case as an irrelevant exception.
Add boundary clauses to validated schemas
Reformulate validated schemas with explicit boundary clauses that specify the conditions under which they were tested and the conditions under which they remain untested.
When your framework can't even formulate the right…
When your schema can no longer formulate the questions you need to ask about a domain, treat this incommensurability as a signal that the framework itself has become a cage requiring replacement.
Require 3 recent decision examples for each schema — fewer…
In your schema inventory, require behavioral proof by identifying three decisions from the last month that each schema governed—if you cannot find three, reclassify the schema as aspirational rather than operational.
When two schemas both hold after evidence review, build…
When schema conflict persists after examining evidence, build a conditional routing rule specifying the exact conditions under which each schema applies rather than attempting to pick a universal winner.
Bridge domains through structural patterns, not surface…
When creating bridge nodes between domains, link to structural patterns (diminishing returns, feedback delays, threshold effects) rather than surface metaphors (companies as bodies), because only structural correspondence enables valid inference transfer across contexts.
Audit each schema's implicit assumptions, then…
For each schema, list assumptions it makes—things it takes for granted without defining—then compare assumption lists across schemas to find shared dependency gaps where both schemas assume the same foundational concept but neither defines it.
When a cross-domain analogy breaks down, investigate…
When a cross-domain mapping breaks down or fails, investigate the mismatch systematically rather than forcing the analogy—mapping failures reveal domain-specific structural features that successful mappings cannot expose.
If integration requires reshaping one schema to fit…
When an attempted integration between two schemas forces you to reshape one schema to fit the other rather than discovering a higher-order structure that accommodates both unchanged, you are executing Procrustean integration—abandon the attempt and either maintain the schemas separately or search for a genuinely encompassing framework.
Name the schema before building the agent — a reliably…
Before building any agent, explicitly name the schema it operates on by writing what the agent assumes about how the world works, because unexamined schemas produce systematically wrong outputs despite reliable execution.
When improvement stalls despite effort, shift…
When improvement effort in a domain has stalled despite sustained attention, shift focus from single-loop correction (adjusting actions) to double-loop correction (questioning the framework generating actions) by explicitly listing and testing the assumptions underlying your approach.