Mental models are most powerful when used together. These chains show how to combine frameworks in sequence for specific outcomes.
Individual mental models are useful. Chaining them together is transformative. Each chain below shows a sequence of 3–5 models applied in order to a specific type of challenge — with the output of each step feeding into the next.
Before committing to anything important, run it through this sequence.
Imagine the project has already failed. List every reason why. This surfaces risks your optimism hides.
Output → A list of specific failure modes
For each failure mode, invert it into a prevention action. What specifically would you do to make each failure impossible?
Output → A prevention plan for each risk
Can you restructure so that some of these risks actually benefit you if they occur? Look for barbell opportunities — cap the downside, open the upside.
Output → A plan that gains from some volatility
Add buffer. Whatever your timeline, budget, and resource estimates are — add margin. You've already identified the risks. Now insure against the ones you missed.
Result → A robust, antifragile plan with known risks mitigated
For high-stakes decisions where you want to be thorough.
Strip away assumptions. What's actually true about this situation? What are you accepting as given that might not be?
Output → The fundamental truths of the situation
For each option, map the consequences — then the consequences of those consequences. What happens after "what happens next"?
Output → A map of cascading effects for each option
For the leading option, identify the best alternative you're giving up. Is the gap between them large enough to justify the choice?
Output → The true cost of your preferred option
Assign probabilities to each outcome. Calculate expected values. Does the option with the best expected value match your intuitive preference?
Output → A probability-weighted comparison
Project yourself to age 80. Which choice will you regret not taking? If the analysis and the gut diverge, pay attention to both.
Result → A high-quality decision you can stand behind
Before accepting or rejecting any claim.
Rebuild the strongest possible version of the argument. If you can't make a compelling case for it, you don't understand it well enough to reject it.
How common is this claim's conclusion in general? What does the background data say before you consider the specific evidence?
How much should this evidence shift your prior belief? Update proportionally — strong evidence moves you a lot, weak evidence moves you a little.
Could any evidence, even in principle, prove this claim wrong? If not, the claim is unfalsifiable — it feels like knowledge but it isn't.
Result → A calibrated, honest assessment of the claim's strength
These chains are starting points. As you learn more models, you’ll discover your own powerful combinations. The skill is recognising which models apply to your specific situation and in what order.
Use the Thinking Toolkit Matcher to find models for your situation, then sequence them into your own chain.