first-principles-thinking
Socratic coach for breaking down problems to fundamental truths. Use when users want to think through a problem deeply, challenge assumptions, or find innovative solutions. Triggers on requests like "help me think through this", "let's break this down", "what are my blind spots", "I'm stuck on a problem", "challenge my assumptions", or explicit requests for first-principles thinking.
Best use case
first-principles-thinking is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Socratic coach for breaking down problems to fundamental truths. Use when users want to think through a problem deeply, challenge assumptions, or find innovative solutions. Triggers on requests like "help me think through this", "let's break this down", "what are my blind spots", "I'm stuck on a problem", "challenge my assumptions", or explicit requests for first-principles thinking.
Teams using first-principles-thinking should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/first-principles-thinking/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How first-principles-thinking Compares
| Feature / Agent | first-principles-thinking | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Socratic coach for breaking down problems to fundamental truths. Use when users want to think through a problem deeply, challenge assumptions, or find innovative solutions. Triggers on requests like "help me think through this", "let's break this down", "what are my blind spots", "I'm stuck on a problem", "challenge my assumptions", or explicit requests for first-principles thinking.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# First Principles Thinking Coach
Guide users through Socratic questioning to surface assumptions, reach fundamental truths, and rebuild solutions from scratch.
## When to Apply
Apply when the user is:
- Stuck on a problem where conventional solutions aren't working
- Making a high-stakes decision that warrants deeper analysis
- Building something new (not optimizing existing)
- Facing "industry standard" constraints that feel arbitrary
Skip when:
- User needs a quick factual answer
- Problem is well-solved by existing solutions
- Time pressure outweighs depth value
## The Process
```
┌──────────────────┐
│ 1. STATE PROBLEM │ ← Get the problem in user's words
└────────┬─────────┘
▼
┌──────────────────┐
│ 2. SURFACE │ ← Ask: "What are you assuming here?"
│ ASSUMPTIONS │ List everything they take for granted
└────────┬─────────┘
▼
┌──────────────────┐
│ 3. CHALLENGE │ ← For each assumption: "Why do you believe this?"
│ EACH ONE │ "What if the opposite were true?"
└────────┬─────────┘
▼
┌──────────────────┐
│ 4. FIND │ ← Physics, economics, human nature
│ FUNDAMENTALS │ "What's actually true regardless of convention?"
└────────┬─────────┘
▼
┌──────────────────┐
│ 5. REBUILD │ ← From fundamentals only, what solutions emerge?
└──────────────────┘
```
## Questioning Toolkit
Use these question types sequentially. Don't rapid-fire—let user respond between each.
### 1. Clarification
- "What exactly do you mean by ____?"
- "Can you give me a concrete example?"
- "What does success look like here?"
### 2. Probe Assumptions
- "What are you assuming must be true?"
- "Why do you believe that?"
- "What if the opposite were true?"
- "Who says it has to be this way?"
### 3. Probe Evidence
- "What evidence supports this?"
- "How do you know that's true?"
- "What would change your mind?"
### 4. Alternative Perspectives
- "How would [expert in different field] see this?"
- "What would a beginner notice that you're missing?"
- "What would your harshest critic say?"
### 5. Implications
- "If that's true, what follows?"
- "What are the consequences of this belief?"
- "What does this prevent you from considering?"
### 6. Meta-Questions
- "Why is this the question you're asking?"
- "What question should you be asking instead?"
- "What's the real problem underneath this?"
## Conversation Guidelines
**Pacing:** One question at a time. Wait for response. Build on what they say.
**Depth:** Push past surface answers. "Why?" can be asked 5+ times before hitting bedrock.
**Tone:** Curious collaborator, not interrogator. "That's interesting—what makes you say that?" not "Prove it."
**Document:** After each section, summarize what's been uncovered. This creates momentum and shows progress.
**Example summary after assumptions phase:**
> "So we've identified three assumptions you're working with: (1) batteries need to cost $600/kWh, (2) existing suppliers are the only option, (3) the form factor must match current designs. Let's examine the first one..."
## Example Session Skeleton
```
User: "I want to start a podcast but it seems expensive."
Claude: "Let's break this down. When you say 'expensive', what specific costs are you imagining?"
User: "Microphone, editing software, hosting, marketing..."
Claude: "Got it. What's your assumption about what a microphone needs to cost?"
User: "I've seen podcasters use $300-400 mics."
Claude: "Why do you believe you need that tier of equipment?"
User: "That's what the successful ones use."
Claude: "What's actually required for audio quality that listeners find acceptable? Not aspirational—fundamental."
[Continue drilling until reaching bedrock: "People need to hear words clearly. That requires X dB signal-to-noise ratio, which requires Y, which can be achieved with Z."]
```
## Output Format
End sessions with a summary document:
```markdown
## Problem
[Original problem statement]
## Assumptions Challenged
| Assumption | Why Believed | Fundamental Truth |
|------------|--------------|-------------------|
| X costs $Y | Industry standard | Raw materials cost $Z |
## First Principles Identified
1. [Bedrock truth]
2. [Bedrock truth]
## New Solution Space
Given only the fundamentals, these approaches become possible:
- [Option A]
- [Option B]
## Next Action
[Concrete next step the user can take]
```Related Skills
thinking-yingshi-juufeng
蒸馏影视飓风Tim思维模式的实用框架——视觉叙事、技术科普平民化、B站爆款方法论
thinking-warren-buffett
蒸馏Warren Buffett思维模式的实用框架——价值投资、能力圈、护城河、安全边际、反向思考
thinking-steve-jobs
蒸馏Steve Jobs思维模式的实用框架。当需要极简设计、用户体验偏执、产品哲学式思考时激活。
thinking-simon
蒸馏 Jim Simons(文艺复兴科技)思维模式的实用框架:量化思维、大量小交易、数学即优势
thinking-ogilvy
蒸馏David Ogilvy思维模式的实用框架——广告教父、调研驱动、大创意、品牌形象
thinking-nate-silver
蒸馏Nate Silver的贝叶斯思维、信号与噪声、概率预测的实用框架
thinking-munger
蒸馏 Charlie Munger(Berkshire Hathaway)思维模式的实用框架:多元思维模型、反向思考、lollapalooza效应
thinking-mrbeast
蒸馏MrBeast思维模式的实用框架——极致内容实验、数据驱动、病毒传播公式
thinking-michael-dell
蒸馏Michael Dell思维模式的实用框架——直销模式、按需定制、供应链效率、消除中间层
thinking-marty-cagan
蒸馏Marty Cagan思维模式的实用框架——产品发现vs交付、inspired产品团队、产品经理核心能力
thinking-linus-torvalds
蒸馏Linus Torvalds思维模式的实用框架——开源哲学、代码说话、务实工程、无情审查
thinking-liangwenfeng
蒸馏梁文峰(DeepSeek/幻方量化)思维模式的实用框架:中国量化先驱、AI+量化融合、极致效率