A leader who never changes their mind is not decisive — they're just stuck. The medieval Jewish philosopher Maimonides... wait, scratch that. Here's the more interesting problem: Hannah Arendt, writing about political action in 'The Human Condition', noticed that every decision a leader makes is irreversible in a way ordinary choices aren't. You can apologize, but you cannot un-act. This is what makes the moment *before* a decision so asymmetrically important — not the choice itself, but whether you've genuinely stress-tested it or simply dressed up a preference as a conclusion. Arendt's practical remedy was what she called 'representative thinking' — deliberately imagining how the decision looks from positions you don't occupy. Not empathy, exactly. More like rehearsing dissent before it arrives in the room. Today, before finalizing any significant commitment, spend two minutes inhabiting the perspective of the person most likely to think you're wrong. Not to talk yourself out of it — just to see if the decision gets stronger or starts to wobble.

Who in your life would most quickly spot the flaw in your current plan — and when did you last actually ask them?

Drawing from Existentialism / Political Philosophy — Hannah Arendt