Frequently asked questions about thinking, epistemology, and cognitive tools. 567 answers
Open your journal, task manager, or notes from the past two weeks. Look for three instances where reality surprised you — a prediction that missed, a conversation that went sideways, a decision that produced unexpected results. Write each on its own line. Now ask: do these point to the same.
List ten schemas you actively rely on — beliefs, mental models, or frameworks that guide your decisions across different domains. For each one, estimate the last time it needed meaningful revision and the approximate rate at which its domain changes. Then assign each schema to one of four cadence.
Start a schema evolution log today. Choose three beliefs that have significantly changed in the last five years — about your career, a relationship, a skill, a domain you care about, or yourself. For each, write a log entry using this structure: (1) The belief as you held it before the change — in.
Run a personal PESTLE scan. Write down one force from each category — Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, Environmental — that is currently pressuring a schema you hold about your career, your industry, or your daily workflow. For each force, rate: (1) How strong is this pressure.
Pick one schema you rely on daily — how you make decisions, how you manage time, how you evaluate people. Set a 30-minute calendar event for this week. During that block, write down the schema's core assumptions. For each assumption, ask: When did I last test this? What evidence would change my.
Pick three beliefs you held five years ago that you no longer hold. For each, write: (1) the old schema, (2) the trigger that destabilized it, (3) the new schema that replaced it, (4) what changed in your behavior as a result. You now have a concrete growth log — proof that your development is.
Pick one schema you use regularly — how you evaluate people, how you decide what to read, how you prioritize tasks. Write down the schema itself (the rules, heuristics, or criteria it contains). Then answer three meta-questions about it: (1) Where did this schema come from? (2) When was it last.
Recall the last three mental models you formed — about a new technology, a person, a situation, anything. For each one, reconstruct how it formed: (1) What triggered the need for a new model? (2) What raw material did you draw on — experience, reading, conversation, analogy? (3) Did the model.
Pick one schema you actively rely on — a belief about how your industry works, a model of what motivates your team, a theory about your own productivity patterns. Score it on each of the six criteria from this lesson (accuracy, predictive power, scope, simplicity, fruitfulness, falsifiability).
Pick one schema you hold strongly — a belief about your career, your relationships, or your capabilities. Ask: what must be true for this schema to hold? Write down three underlying beliefs it depends on. Then pick one of those and repeat: what must be true for that belief to hold? You have just.
Identify two schemas you hold that have recently contradicted each other — they might sound like competing proverbs, opposing instincts, or clashing advice you've internalized from different mentors. Write each one as a clear declarative statement. Then write a third statement: the rule for when.
Pick a real decision you're currently facing. List every schema (mental model, framework, lens) you could apply to it — aim for at least four. For each, write one sentence: what would this schema optimize for? Then answer three selection questions: (1) What is the cost of being wrong? (2) How fast.
Write down your honest answers to these four questions: (1) Do you believe some people are just naturally better learners than others? (2) Do you believe understanding a topic should happen quickly if you're smart enough? (3) Do you believe knowledge mostly comes from authorities, or mostly from.
Write down how you believe personal change works. Not how you think it should work — how you actually operate when you try to change a habit, a belief, or a pattern. Do you assume change happens in a single decision? Gradually through repetition? Only through crisis? Through deliberate practice?.
Write down three major decisions you made in the last six months. For each one, identify the time schema that drove it. Were you optimizing for a deadline (linear/chronos)? Waiting for the right moment (cyclical/kairos)? Avoiding a future you feared (past-negative projection)? Chasing a reward.
Write down your answers to these four questions: (1) Can knowledge be certain, or is all knowledge provisional? (2) Is knowledge something you receive from authorities or something you construct through experience? (3) Is the world fundamentally simple and knowable, or complex and partially.
Pick one domain you operate in daily — managing people, writing code, making decisions, maintaining a relationship. Write down three schemas you use in that domain, one at each level: (1) a concrete procedure — the specific steps you follow, (2) a principle — the general rule that governs quality,.
Pick a recent decision you feel confident you understand — why you made it, what drove it. Write your explanation in two or three sentences. Now ask someone who observed the decision to give their honest read on why you made it. Compare the two accounts. Where they diverge is where your.
Pick one recurring decision type in your life — how you respond to criticism, how you start a new project, how you handle uncertainty. Write out the actual sequence your mind runs: What triggers it? What does it assume? What does it skip? What output does it produce? You are reverse-engineering.
Identify one area where you have been repeatedly solving the same type of problem — recurring conflicts, repeated planning failures, chronic indecision in a specific domain. Write down the surface-level pattern (the symptom). Then ask: what schema am I using to approach this type of problem? Write.
Take five concepts you have been thinking about recently — from any domain. Write each one on a separate card or line. Now draw connections between them: which supports which? Which contradicts which? Which enables or extends another? Label each connection. You now have a five-node knowledge.
Open your primary note system. Pick 10 notes at random — not your best ones, just 10. For each note, write one sentence answering: 'What single idea does this note contain?' If you can't answer in one sentence, the note contains multiple potential nodes and needs splitting. If the sentence is.
Open your note system and find five links between notes. For each one, write a one-word label that describes the relationship: causes, contradicts, extends, supports, exemplifies, enables, refines, or something domain-specific. If you cannot name the relationship, ask yourself whether the link is.
Pick two subjects you know well and one you're just beginning to learn. For each, list 10 concepts from memory. Then draw the connections between them — every relationship you can articulate (causes, enables, contradicts, exemplifies, depends on). Count the edges. Calculate the density: edges.