Think independently, remain open to correction

I study people who have built serious things, and I still want the reason behind an idea before I keep it.

A working rule. Not an absolute.

Entry updated 26 Oct 2026

A person's record is not a proof of their next claim. I can learn from how someone builds, designs, or trades, and still reject a specific argument they make.

The useful question is the reasoning. What would have to be true for this idea to hold, and what evidence would make me drop it?

I also want a clear line around what I actually understand. Confidence without that line is how I end up repeating someone else.

Influences

Elon Musk, Steve Jobs, and P. R. Sundar are three of the people on the influences page. Following them is not agreement.

How I apply it

Separate the work I admire from the claim in front of me.
Write down what I am unsure about, especially when the source is someone I respect.
Update the note when the evidence changes, instead of defending the first version.

What I can actually point to

This page is the practice: principles that say what would change my mind, and notes that say where I could still be wrong.

Where this could be wrong

Independence can become stubbornness. Being open to correction means I have to let a good argument in, including one from a person I do not want to copy.

What could change my mind?

Noticing that I am collecting famous names instead of testing the ideas.
Noticing that I am rejecting an idea only because of who said it.