Frequently asked questions about thinking, epistemology, and cognitive tools. 1431 answers
Looking for evidence that supports your schema is not the same as rigorously testing it.
Looking for evidence that supports your schema is not the same as rigorously testing it.
Deliberately try to break your own mental model before relying on it.
Deliberately try to break your own mental model before relying on it.
Deliberately try to break your own mental model before relying on it.
Pick one belief you currently hold with high confidence — about your career, your team, a market trend, or a personal relationship. Write it as a single declarative statement. Now spend 10 minutes writing the strongest possible case against it. Do not write a weak objection you can easily dismiss..
Going through the motions of devil's advocacy without genuine intent to find flaws. You ask 'what could go wrong?' and generate comfortable, easily dismissed objections that leave your original schema untouched. This is confirmation bias wearing a red team costume. The test: if your red team.
Deliberately try to break your own mental model before relying on it.
Testing takes time and energy — validate the schemas that matter most first.
Testing takes time and energy — validate the schemas that matter most first.
Testing takes time and energy — validate the schemas that matter most first.
Testing takes time and energy — validate the schemas that matter most first.
List five schemas (beliefs, mental models, operating assumptions) you currently rely on. For each one, estimate two things: (1) how much damage you'd suffer if this schema is wrong, and (2) how much time and energy it would take to validate it properly. Now rank them by the ratio of potential.
Two opposite traps. First: validating everything equally, burning through cognitive resources on low-stakes schemas while high-stakes ones go unexamined. This is the perfectionist's failure — treating all uncertainty as equally dangerous. Second: using the cost of validation as a blanket excuse to.
Testing takes time and energy — validate the schemas that matter most first.
When direct testing is impossible look for indirect evidence and converging indicators.
When direct testing is impossible look for indirect evidence and converging indicators.
Identify one schema you hold that cannot be tested through a single direct observation — something about your motivation, your relationships, your learning style, or your decision-making tendencies. Write the schema as a clear statement. Then generate five independent indicators that would be.
Treating the absence of direct evidence as the absence of any evidence. This is the error of demanding courtroom-standard proof for every schema, then concluding that schemas about internal states, relationships, or complex systems are simply unknowable. The opposite failure is equally dangerous:.
When direct testing is impossible look for indirect evidence and converging indicators.
Having trusted people review your mental models catches errors you miss.
Having trusted people review your mental models catches errors you miss.
Having trusted people review your mental models catches errors you miss.
Having trusted people review your mental models catches errors you miss.