Brunswick on Nostr: This is my attempt at honoring the late Scott Adams’ contribution to the world. ...

This is my attempt at honoring the late Scott Adams’ contribution to the world.

Over time, Adams articulated what he called a *user interface for reality*—a practical framework for navigating the world as it actually operates, not as we wish it did. These ideas are not about moral virtue-signaling or abstract truth-seeking; they are about agency, persuasion, survival, and authorship in a reality mediated by human perception.

I will be posting one of his core bits of advice each day—what he referred to as the *knobs*: adjustable parameters that determine how effectively you author your own life, influence outcomes, and interact with other people inside complex social systems.

---

## Knob #1: Accept the Frame (Subjective Reality)

**One-sentence formulation:**
*Reality is experienced through narrative frames, not raw facts; if you argue facts without first identifying the frame, you are operating inside someone else’s interface.*

### What “the frame” is

A *frame* is the invisible boundary that defines how information is interpreted before reasoning begins. It determines what counts as relevant, what is assumed, what is emotional, what is moral, and what is even allowed to be questioned.

Frames are not facts. They are **contextual lenses**.

Most people mistake the frame for reality itself. That mistake is the primary source of confusion, manipulation, and wasted effort in politics, business, relationships, and public discourse.

### Subjective reality, not relativism

Adams is not claiming that objective truth does not exist. He is pointing out that humans do not interact with objective truth directly. They interact with **compressed, biased, story-driven models** of reality that feel true because they are coherent, emotionally resonant, and socially reinforced.

In practice:
- Truth does not persuade.
- Frames persuade.
- Facts are interpreted *after* the frame is accepted.

This is why intelligent people can look at the same data and reach opposite conclusions—because the disagreement is upstream of the data.

### Why arguing facts usually fails

When you argue facts inside a hostile frame, you legitimize the frame itself. You accept its premises, its moral structure, and its implied authority.

Examples:
- Answering a loaded question accepts the accusation.
- Defending yourself inside a false narrative validates the narrative.
- Providing data to someone who has framed the issue emotionally is ignored or reinterpreted.

Once you are inside the wrong frame, no amount of factual accuracy will save you.

### What “accept the frame” actually means

It does **not** mean agreeing with the frame.
It means recognizing that:
1. A frame is present.
2. It is shaping perception.
3. It is optional.

Once you see the frame as a construct rather than reality, you regain freedom of movement. You can:
- Reframe the issue
- Step outside the frame entirely
- Or use the frame tactically without believing it

The key shift is epistemic: *the frame is not the truth; it is the interface.*

### Why this is the first knob

Every other knob—persuasion, confidence, identity, leverage, emotion, narrative—depends on framing. If you misidentify perception as reality, you will constantly fight uphill battles against invisible constraints you never agreed to.

Adams’ insight is brutal but accurate:
**You don’t lose most arguments because you’re wrong. You lose because you never noticed the rules of the game.**

Seeing the frame is the beginning of authorship.

Tomorrow’s knob builds on this: once you see the interface, the question becomes how to move within it without being owned by it.