N-Dimension Problem

The challenge of trying to comprehend or communicate about a subject that exists across many simultaneous planes of reality (e.g., emotional, economic, historical, biological, digital), when our tools for thinking are inherently low-dimensional. We're forced to create flat, simplistic models (2D graphs, binary arguments) of phenomena that are fundamentally multi-dimensional, losing critical information.

Example: Understanding a person's "health." A doctor might see the biological dimension (lab results). An insurer sees the economic dimension (costs). The patient feels the emotional and psychological dimensions. A sociologist sees the public health dimension. No single view is complete. Arguing that any one dimension is the "real" truth is an N-Dimension Problem—flattening a hyper-complex reality into a manageable but false simplicity.

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026

N-Axis Problem

The paralysis or incoherence that arises when a person, group, or ideology must navigate a world defined by numerous, often conflicting, value axes simultaneously (e.g., liberty vs. security, innovation vs. tradition, equity vs. efficiency). Optimizing for one axis automatically worsens your position on another. There is no perfect point, only a messy, contested frontier of trade-offs.

Example: Designing a content moderation policy. You must balance axes of free speech, user safety, political neutrality, engagement growth, and legal compliance. Maximizing free speech (one axis) may increase hate speech (worsening safety). Perfect neutrality may be impossible as every rule has political implications. This isn't a puzzle with an answer, but an N-Axis Problem of perpetual negotiation and imperfect compromise.

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026

N-Variant Problem

The recognition that within any broad category (e.g., "democracy," "socialism," "mental illness," "woman"), there exists a near-infinite number of context-specific variants, each with unique properties. Treating the category as a monolith or applying a one-size-fits-all solution inevitably fails because it ignores this essential, fractal diversity.

Example: The "N-Variant Problem of Democracy." Direct democracy in a Swiss canton, representative democracy in India, and consensus-based democracy in a small Indigenous tribe are wildly different variants. A pundit arguing that "Democracy is failing" or "Democracy requires X" is usually ignoring this vast spectrum, treating a universe of variants as a single, failing prototype.

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026

N-Variable Problem

A computational or analytical nightmare where the outcome depends on a vast number of input variables, many of which are unknown, unmeasurable, or change in real-time. Unlike a controlled experiment with few variables, here the interactions are so numerous that isolating cause and effect, or making reliable predictions, becomes a fool's errand.

*Example: Predicting the success of a startup. Variables include the team's skill, market timing, investor sentiment, technological shifts, competitor actions, regulatory changes, and pure luck. A VC's spreadsheet model with 20 key metrics is laughably simplistic against the true N-Variable Problem. Overconfident predictions are a sign of not grasping the variable space's sheer size.*

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026

Hard Problem of Proof

The philosophical and practical impossibility of providing evidence so absolute and universally acceptable that it compels belief in all rational observers, especially in social, ethical, or historical domains. What constitutes "proof" is itself a contested cultural construct, and the demand for impossible, frictionless proof is often a disingenuous tactic to maintain skepticism.

Example: Proving systemic racism. You can provide statistics on sentencing disparities, historical records, personal testimonies, and sociological studies. A skeptic will dismiss each as "correlation not causation," "anecdotal," "biased," or "theoretical." The Hard Problem of Proof is that no evidence can penetrate a worldview that redefines proof itself to preserve its assumptions.

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026

Hard Problem of Logic

The inherent limitation of formal logic: it can only manipulate premises, not validate them. Logic can tell you that if your assumptions are true, then a conclusion follows. But it cannot tell you if your foundational premises about the world are true, complete, or relevant. Applying pristine logic to messy human reality often produces conclusions that are logically valid but substantively absurd.

Example: "Logical" arguments against action on climate change: "Developing nations are increasing emissions, so our cuts are pointless. Logically, we should do nothing." The logic is valid from the narrow premise, but it ignores ethical responsibility, historical context, and the premise's own fatalism. This is the Hard Problem of Logic—it's a perfect tool within its cage, but the cage is built from unexamined assumptions.

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026

Hard Problem of Reason

The paradox that human rationality is bounded, emotional, and culturally shaped, yet we must use this imperfect tool to understand itself and the world. "Pure reason" is a fantasy; our reasoning is always motivated, contextual, and built on subconscious foundations. The problem is that we cannot step outside of reason to objectively audit it, creating a foundational circularity.

Example: A "rationalist" community that uses reason to deconstruct all beliefs, arriving at cold utilitarianism. They fail to see that their choice to value logical consistency and utility maximization is itself an unreasoned preference, an emotional allegiance to a particular aesthetic of thinking. They've hit the Hard Problem of Reason: their tool cannot justify its own prime directives.

by Dumuabzu February 8, 2026