The irreducible epistemic atoms underlying the curriculum. 4,828 atoms across 8 types and 2 molecules
Before making significant decisions, construct a diverse input set that includes at least one person likely to disagree with your current leaning, one with direct domain experience, and one outside the domain who might see what insiders miss.
Before declaring a value conflict irresolvable, verify that both values are truly terminal rather than instrumental—many apparent conflicts between values dissolve when you discover one is actually a means to the other.
When facing a decision between two conflicting values, name both values explicitly in writing side-by-side before choosing, then articulate the specific sacrifice being made ('I am choosing X over Y today because ___') to make the trade-off conscious rather than implicit.
When two values conflict in a decision and you cannot satisfy both, consult your pre-established lexicographic hierarchy—satisfy the higher-ranked value first, then optimize for the lower-ranked value within that constraint.
Define each abstract value with operational specificity by writing one to three sentences that would enable an observer to predict your behavior in concrete situations, not dictionary definitions.
Before using AI for values-related decisions, articulate your values and hierarchy explicitly—then use AI to generate arguments from your stated values' perspective rather than accepting AI recommendations as substitute values.
When someone imposes a deadline on a decision, ask 'What changes if this decision is made tomorrow instead of today?' before complying to distinguish genuine from artificial urgency.
Before accepting work that conflicts with your values due to financial pressure, calculate the actual cost—not the feared cost—of declining it, including runway at current spend and required lifestyle adjustments, because perceived financial threat often exceeds actual constraint.