Seven Lenses Interrogate Options, Not Just Claims
The Seven Lenses were designed to decompose claims in learning objectives. They adapt directly to interrogating decision options.
The Adaptation
| Lens | For Claims | For Decision Options |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanism | HOW does this happen? | HOW does this option actually create the outcome I want? |
| Actors | WHO does this? Who benefits? | WHO wins if I choose this? Who loses? Who’s invisible? |
| Conditions | What if X changed? | Under what conditions does this option succeed? Fail? |
| Scale | At what level does this hold? | Does this option work at different scales (time, money, commitment)? |
| Sequence | What comes first? | What has to happen FIRST for this to work? What depends on what? |
| Trade-offs | What’s the cost? | What am I GIVING UP by choosing this? Hidden costs? |
| Scope | When doesn’t this hold? | When would this option NOT be the right choice? |
Quick Reference for Option Analysis
| Lens | Question Stem | What It Catches |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanism | ”How would this actually work?” | Magical thinking, missing steps |
| Actors | ”Who benefits? Who loses?” | Hidden stakeholders, unintended effects |
| Conditions | ”What would make this fail?” | Fragile assumptions, dependencies |
| Scale | ”Does this scale up/down?” | Options that only work at current size |
| Sequence | ”What’s the prerequisite chain?” | Execution complexity, blocking dependencies |
| Trade-offs | ”What am I sacrificing?” | Opportunity costs, hidden prices |
| Scope | ”When is this wrong?” | Overgeneralization, edge cases |
When to Use
| Mode | Lenses |
|---|---|
| Q1: HEURISTIC | Skip |
| Q2: SYSTEMATIZE | Pick 1-2 most relevant |
| Q3: CAREFUL | Pick 3-4 most relevant |
| Q4: BUILD CAPABILITY | All 7, documented |
Workflow
Use after Self-Diagnostic Using Pareto Questions, before Bias Detection Checklist for Decisions:
- Self-diagnostic (what’s really going on with me?)
- Seven Lenses on each option (what’s really going on with each choice?)
- Bias detection (what distortions am I applying?)
Example: GIC Calculator Decision
Option: Build the calculator myself
| Lens | Question | Finding |
|---|---|---|
| Mechanism | How does building a calculator make me better at financial decisions? | It doesn’t directly — it helps me verify decisions, different thing |
| Actors | Who wins? Who loses? | I win (skill, portfolio piece). Future me loses (opportunity cost). Professionals lose (I don’t hire them). |
| Conditions | What would make this fail? | If I can’t fact-check the LLM synthesis. If the domain is too complex. If a better tool already exists. |
| Scale | Does this scale? | Time investment is one-time, but verification skill scales to other domains |
| Sequence | What has to happen first? | Research → synthesis → build → test → iterate. Research quality determines everything downstream. |
| Trade-offs | What am I giving up? | Time for other projects. Could just hire advisor for one-time consultation. |
| Scope | When is this the wrong choice? | If this is actually a one-time decision. If existing tools solve it. If the stakes don’t justify the build. |
Common Trap
Running all seven lenses on Q1/Q2 decisions. The lenses take time. Low-stakes or one-time decisions don’t justify the investment. Match lens depth to quadrant.
North: Where this comes from
- Seven Lenses for Decomposing Claims (the source framework)
- The Decision Lifecycle (where this fits in the sequence)
East: What opposes this?
- Pros and Cons Lists (surface-level, no systematic interrogation)
- Single-Criterion Decisions (optimize one thing, ignore others)
South: Where this leads
- Bias Detection Checklist for Decisions (what comes after)
- Build Capability Mode (where full lens analysis is warranted)
West: What’s similar?
- MECE Analysis (mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive)
- Pre-Mortem (similar to Conditions lens)
- Opportunity Cost Thinking (similar to Trade-offs lens)