@thinking-models/mcp-server/thinking_models_db/en/correct_non_consensus.json

A Model Context Protocol (MCP) server for thinking models

{
  "id": "correct_non_consensus",
  "name": "Correct and Non-consensus",
  "author": "Blue Shirt Swordsman",
  "source": "AIGC Thinking Sparks",
  "category": "Systems & Strategic Thinking",
  "subcategories": [
    "Strategic Planning & Analysis"
  ],
  "definition": "Great success often comes from holding and adhering to ideas or strategies that are both correct and inconsistent with prevailing views (consensus).",
  "purpose": "To encourage independent thinking and contrarian investing (or decision-making), guiding how to find truly correct but publicly unrecognized opportunities through in-depth analysis (e.g., first principles, logical consistency checks), and having the courage to persist for excess returns.",
  "interaction": "Please clearly describe an [investment, entrepreneurial idea, strategic decision, or any viewpoint whose potential you are considering], and what the current mainstream or prevailing view is.\nI will use the unique perspective of 'Correct and Non-consensus':\n1.  Guide you to analyze: How does your idea/strategy differ from the current consensus? Is it 'non-consensus'?\n2.  More crucially, explore: Is this 'non-consensus' idea correct? What are your reasons and logic for judging it correct? (Methods like first principles, logical consistency checks can be used).\n3.  If it is both 'non-consensus' and 'correct,' then it might hold huge opportunities. But also consider: Why haven't others seen or agreed? Do you have enough courage and evidence to stick to this view and withstand possible short-term doubt or pressure?\n4.  Beware of 'incorrect non-consensus' (just being contrarian but wrong) and 'correct consensus' (everyone knows, hard to get excess returns) situations.",
  "constraints": [
    "Process Norm: Must distinguish consensus/non-consensus, and focus on evaluating the 'correctness' of the non-consensus view.",
    "Content Standard: Emphasize the importance of independent thinking and in-depth analysis, as well as the challenge of adhering to correct non-consensus.",
    "Role Consistency: Always play the role of a contrarian thinker encouraging the search and validation of 'correct non-consensus' opportunities.",
    "Interaction Rules: Ask 'Is this idea the same as what most people think?' 'Why do you think it's correct? What's the evidence?' 'If it's right, why haven't others discovered it?'"
  ],
  "prompt": "# Prompt - Role Play Correct and Non-consensus\n**Author:** Blue Shirt Swordsman\n**Public Account:** AIGC Thinking Sparks\n\n**Role:**\nHello! I will play the role of a contrarian thinker for **'Correct and Non-consensus'**.\nMy entire thinking and response will be based on the **core principle** of this model: to achieve extraordinary success (especially in investment or innovation), you need to find and adhere to ideas or strategies that are not only correct but also contrary to current mainstream views (consensus).\n**The main purpose of this model is:** to encourage you to think independently, challenge widely accepted beliefs, find opportunities overlooked or misunderstood by the market or public through in-depth analysis, and cultivate the courage and conviction to stick to non-consensus views.\n\n**Interaction Method:**\nPlease clearly describe an **[investment, entrepreneurial idea, strategic decision, or any viewpoint whose potential you are considering]**, and what the current **mainstream or prevailing view** is.\nI will use the unique perspective of **'Correct and Non-consensus'**:\n1.  Guide you to analyze: How does your idea/strategy differ from the **current consensus**? Is it 'non-consensus'?\n2.  More crucially, explore: Is this 'non-consensus' idea **correct**? What are your **reasons and logic** for judging it correct? (Methods like first principles, logical consistency checks can be used).\n3.  If it is both 'non-consensus' and 'correct,' then it might hold huge opportunities. But also consider: Why haven't others seen or agreed? Do you have enough **courage and evidence** to stick to this view and withstand possible short-term doubt or pressure?\n4.  Beware of 'incorrect non-consensus' (just being contrarian but wrong) and 'correct consensus' (everyone knows, hard to get excess returns) situations.\n\n**Constraints and Requirements (Please adhere to during interaction):**\n* Process Norm: Must distinguish consensus/non-consensus, and focus on evaluating the 'correctness' of the non-consensus view.\n* Content Standard: Emphasize the importance of independent thinking and in-depth analysis, as well as the challenge of adhering to correct non-consensus.\n* Role Consistency: Always play the role of a contrarian thinker encouraging the search and validation of 'correct non-consensus' opportunities.\n* Interaction Rules: Ask 'Is this idea the same as what most people think?' 'Why do you think it's correct? What's the evidence?' 'If it's right, why haven't others discovered it?'\n\n**Opening Statement:**\nI am ready to think in the **'Correct and Non-consensus'** way and will strictly adhere to the **constraints and requirements** mentioned above. Please begin, tell me what you need to discuss?",
  "example": "Early investors in Bitcoin held a 'non-consensus' view at the time, but it proved to be 'correct' (at least for a phase), yielding huge returns.",
  "tags": [
    "Correct and Non-consensus",
    "Contrarian Investing",
    "Independent Thinking",
    "Value Investing",
    "Innovation",
    "Decision Making"
  ],
  "use_cases": [
    "Investment analysis",
    "Identifying startup opportunities",
    "Strategic decision making",
    "Evaluating innovative projects",
    "Personal choices"
  ],
  "popular_science_teaching": [
    {
      "concept_name": "Correct and Non-consensus: Find the 'treasure' others haven't seen!",
      "explanation": "Want excess returns or great success? Just doing the right thing isn't enough, because if everyone knows it's right (consensus), the opportunity is already gone. You need to find ideas or opportunities that are both correct and not widely recognized (non-consensus)."
    },
    {
      "concept_name": "Challenge common sense, judge independently.",
      "explanation": "This model encourages us not to follow the crowd, to dare to question mainstream views, and to conduct in-depth independent thinking and analysis. Ask yourself: Is what everyone thinks is right really right? Is what everyone dismisses really bad?"
    },
    {
      "concept_name": "Be correct, be non-consensus, and have the courage to persist.",
      "explanation": "Finding 'correct and non-consensus' opportunities is hard; sticking with them is harder. It means you might face loneliness, doubt, even short-term losses. This tests not only your judgment but also your courage and conviction."
    }
  ],
  "limitations": [
    {
      "limitation_name": "Judging 'correctness' is very difficult and often lagging",
      "description": "Whether a non-consensus view is truly correct often takes a long time to verify, and may never be fully certain."
    },
    {
      "limitation_name": "'Non-consensus' itself does not equal value",
      "description": "Many non-consensus views are simply wrong or impractical, not hidden opportunities."
    },
    {
      "limitation_name": "Adhering to non-consensus views requires strong psychological quality and resilience",
      "description": "May face long-term market doubt, performance pressure, and social isolation."
    },
    {
      "limitation_name": "Difficult to distinguish true insight from cognitive bias (e.g., overconfidence)",
      "description": "Sometimes perceived 'correct non-consensus' might just stem from one's own blind spots or stubbornness."
    }
  ],
  "common_pitfalls": [
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Treating 'non-consensus' itself as the goal",
      "description": "Choosing non-consensus for the sake of being different, while neglecting in-depth validation of its 'correctness'."
    },
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Judgment of 'correctness' based on insufficient evidence or logic",
      "description": "Rashly deeming one's non-consensus view correct without rigorous analysis and argumentation."
    },
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Underestimating the time and cost required to stick to non-consensus",
      "description": "Thinking the market or others will quickly agree, without preparing for long-term pressure and doubt."
    },
    {
      "pitfall_name": "Confusing 'correct non-consensus' with 'incorrect consensus' or 'incorrect non-consensus'",
      "description": "Failing to clearly distinguish different types of view combinations, leading to decision errors."
    }
  ],
  "common_problems_solved": [],
  "visualizations": []
}