if the model isn't useful, just don't use it

---

Two things that are true:

1. The world is complex.
2. We would like to interact with the world.

Obviously, we can't simulate about the world in its entire fractal complexity every time we want to do something. Instead, we taxonomize and categorize, cutting up the world into slices that we can handle, and come up with models that explain how those slices interact. Then, we use those models to communicate things about the world to other people.

This is what people are doing when they say "This is how X is, and this is how it works."

People argue about which models to use all the time. Does being bad at socializing count as autism? Are orcas one species or five?

Often these arguments masquerade as arguments about trueness. People confuse their model for reality, and think other people are trying to tell them that their reality is wrong. This rightfully feels terrible! If there's a way that you know that the world is, but this other guy is out there telling people that that's not the way the world is, it feels like they're straight-up denying reality.

But the measure of whether a model is good is not whether it is true, because there is no way for the model to be "true." It's just one way of slicing up world and trying to explain it. What actually matters is whether the model is useful for interacting with the world.

On a personal level, you can just…not use the model.

For example, suppose that you, like me, have some group of traits that the medical system models as "generalized anxiety disorder."

Using this particular model of yourself can be useful—after all, the term exists to describe this group of traits that you have. You can use it to access information created by those who also use this model, like doctors. You can use the term to help you find a community of people who have dealt with it before, since people like you might also describe themselves as having generalized anxiety disorder. Maybe it helps you simply by suggesting that your nervousness isn't a moral failure, and it's just something wrong with your neurotransmitters or something.

In this case, great! The model is useful and you should use it.

On the other hand, maybe modeling yourself as having an anxiety disorder just makes you feel shitty. Maybe it makes you feel like something is fundamentally wrong with you, and the doctors aren't giving you useful solutions. Maybe you don't care for a community, or you think that the communities that exist are too mopey and sad. Or thinking about the neurotransmitters makes you feel like everything is out of your control.

If so, you might as well just drop this model and try something else.

For me, it was initially useful to have a name for what was going on in my brain, because it helped me internalize that something abnormal was happening. But eventually, I found that the clinical model was not useful for me. It wasn't helping me handle my life better, and I found the push towards medications disconcerting.¹Instead, I found that thinking of things on a more sensory level gave me the handholds I needed to reduce the amount of anxiety in my life.

You cannot choose whether you have the traits or not, but you can choose the model of them that is most useful to you.

footnotes

---

1. due to unrelated personal experiences. I am generally for people medicating for mental illness. ↩