Scientific Definition
Treating one kind of thing as if it belonged to a different ontological category.
Plain-English Definition
Treating one kind of thing as if it belonged to a different ontological category.
Feynman Explanation
Asking 'how heavy is justice?' isn't a hard question. It's the wrong kind of question.
Core Principle
Treating one kind of thing as if it belonged to a different ontological category.
Mechanisms
Pending editorial review.
Treating one kind of thing as if it belonged to a different ontological category.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Most KPI debates are category mistakes — treating a proxy as the thing it proxies for.
Inputs (Triggers)
Pending editorial review.
Outputs (Behaviors)
Pending editorial review.
Behavioral Signature
Asking 'how heavy is justice?' isn't a hard question. It's the wrong kind of question.
Examples
- Gilbert Ryle's example: a visitor sees colleges and asks 'but where is the University?'
- Most KPI debates are category mistakes — treating a proxy as the thing it proxies for.
Pending editorial review.
Famous Experiments
Pending editorial review.
Design Principles
- Before answering, check whether the question's terms are even in the same ontology.
Measurement Approaches
Pending editorial review.
Evidence
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
The Perverse Incentive Lens™
How this behavior is exploited — and how to redesign around it.
- Before answering, check whether the question's terms are even in the same ontology.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Interactive Mini Network
Click any neighbor to re-center the graph and follow the threads of connection.
Knowledge Graph Neighbors
Auto-linked to the rest of the Human Behavior Taxonomy by family, domain, dimension, and shared keywords.
Whoever makes the positive claim carries the obligation to support it. Absence of disproof isn't proof.
Justified true belief isn't always knowledge — luck can produce true beliefs from defective reasoning.
You can't derive an 'ought' (value claim) from an 'is' (factual claim) without a smuggled premise.
If P then Q. P. Therefore Q. The most basic valid inference move in formal logic.
If P then Q. Not Q. Therefore not P. The logic behind every falsification test.
Necessary = required for X. Sufficient = enough on its own for X. Conflating them is a common error.
Assume the opposite of what you want to prove. Derive a contradiction. The opposite must be false.
How will I feel about this in 10 minutes / 10 months / 10 years?
Basics first (health/finances), then depth (mastery/impact), then altruism (widening circle).
A group decides on a course of action that nobody actually wants, because everyone assumes others prefer it.
Inattention or forgetfulness caused by low attention, hyperfocus, or distraction.
Deriving general rules from specific examples; the leap from instance to concept.