exotic-thinking

name	exotic-thinking
description	Use when a problem benefits from nonstandard reasoning lenses: abductive, negative-space, predictive, asymmetric-belief, external-memory-binding, concurrent, split-level, or stigmergic thinking. Apply these as structural analysis prompts, not as magical tools. Useful for difficult debugging, strategy, research synthesis, postmortems, architecture, and reviewing reasoning for gaps or hidden assumptions.
metadata	{"self_test":"python3 scripts/self_test.py"}

Exotic Thinking

Exotic thinking is a set of reasoning lenses. Each lens asks a different question about the same problem structure. The point is not to sound unusual; it is to expose gaps that a single ordinary frame tends to hide.

Use one to three lenses that fit the task. Do not run all eight by default.

The Eight Lenses

See references/paradigm-catalog.md for details.

Lens	Use it to ask
Abductive reasoning	What explanation best accounts for the observations and absences?
Negative-space thinking	What should be present but is missing?
Predictive reasoning	What should happen next if this model is true?
Asymmetric belief	Which branch carries more consequence if wrong?
External memory binding	What prior artifact should anchor this reasoning?
Concurrent reasoning	Which branches can be explored independently?
Split reasoning	What is the object-level move and what is the meta-level correction?
Stigmergic thinking	What traces left by prior work should guide the next move?

Procedure

1. State the ordinary frame first: the problem, evidence, and current favorite explanation.
2. Choose the lens or lenses that attack the weakest part of that frame.
3. For each lens, produce concrete observations, not vibes.
4. Mark outputs as hypotheses, gaps, predictions, or anchors.
5. Run a failable check when a lens changes the decision.
6. Synthesize: what changed, what stayed unproven, and what action follows.

Guardrails

• These lenses do not generate truth. They generate structured questions.
• Do not treat a lens name as evidence.
• Do not invent hidden systems, actors, or motives without evidence.
• Do not replace ordinary verification with exotic vocabulary.
• Prefer the smallest lens that exposes the actual uncertainty.

Output Shape

Lens:
Question asked:
Evidence considered:
Finding:
Decision impact:
Check or next action:
Unverified remainder:

Done Means

• The selected lenses match the uncertainty.
• Each finding maps back to evidence or is explicitly marked as a hypothesis.
• At least one ordinary verification step follows any decision-changing finding.
• The final synthesis is actionable and does not overclaim.