Methodological module
First-principles thinking
We are testing whether an assumed constraint is actually a fact.
- When it helps
- Use it when every option looks like a variation of the current system or when a supposed constraint may only be convention.
- Origin
- First-principles thinking · assumption decomposition
What this module does
First-principles thinking decomposes a problem into facts, assumptions, and requirements, then rebuilds possible solutions from what remains true. Its purpose is not novelty for its own sake but freedom from inherited constraints.
How to use it
- State the outcome without naming a preferred solution.
- List facts that can be checked.
- List assumptions, conventions, and analogies separately.
- Identify the minimum requirements that must remain true.
- Rebuild at least three approaches from those requirements.
- Test the cheapest uncertain assumption first.
Practical example
Situation
A team assumes customer onboarding must be a sequence of live training calls.
Result
The actual requirements are trust, correct setup, and proof of value. The rebuilt options include an interactive checklist plus one optional expert review.
Limitations
- Not every convention is arbitrary; some encode hard-won safety or domain knowledge.
- Decomposition takes time and may be excessive for reversible small choices.
- The method still needs evidence to validate rebuilt options.
Standalone template
Copy these prompts and work through them without Selecton.
Desired outcome: …
Verified facts: …
Assumptions and conventions: …
Minimum requirements: …
Three rebuilt approaches: …
Cheapest assumption test: …
How it fits into Selecton
The app keeps a reliable five-stage baseline and now adds an adaptive-methods-v1 layer: typed method cards can be selected automatically or received as an explicit lens from a method page. Full non-linear routing and effectiveness measurement remain under evaluation.
Auto, adaptation, and combinations
The intended Auto mode selects one primary method for the next useful move, based on the state of the decision. A route may use different modules in sequence—for example GROW to clarify a goal, weighted criteria to compare options, then a pre-mortem to test the plan. They are not blended into an opaque prompt: every transition should remain explainable and reversible to the baseline route.