What’s this about?

This book is about reframing — changing how you think about something — and choosing a perspective that’s useful to you right now, whether or not it’s universally true.

Before we begin, I need to sharpen that word: “true”. In this book, when I say “true”, I mean absolutely, necessarily, objectively true. It’s not only in the mind. Any creature or machine could observe it and agree. It’s a concrete fact — always, everywhere, and for everyone. There’s no other way to see it. That’s what I mean by “true”.

This narrow definition is important because whatever you consider true is closed. No questioning. But when you say “not necessarily true”, it opens it up for reconsideration.

Notice that “not true” does not mean false! It just means not necessarily, objectively, absolutely true for everyone, everywhere, always. It doesn’t mean you’re wrong. It means there could be another possibility or perspective.

Let’s look at “Useful Not True” in five steps:

  1. Almost nothing people say is true.
  2. Your thoughts aren’t true.
  3. Ideas can be useful, not true.
  4. Reframe: Find better perspectives.
  5. Adopt what works for you now.

Your thoughts?
Please leave a reply:


Comments

  1. Pulkit Batra (2026-02-16)

    "I hope you find this book useful not true"- Derek, Useful not true

    you are my favorite author of all time.

  2. Mark Blasini (2026-06-09)

    I like the concept of useful, not true, but I take issue with your definition of truth, which I find still poorly defined. Truth is a necessary, concrete fact - what everyone, even machines, can agree on. But what would this be? I can't think of anything that is a "necessary" fact. And necessary to whom? To the mind?

    To me, this understanding of truth is a "useful, not true" definition. It is a convenient way of defining truth so that you can make the claim that virtually every philosophy, perspective, belief can be valid on the grounds of effectiveness (effective action) - not truth.

    I don't necessarily disagree with this point, by the way, but I could just as easily define truth differently. What if truth is not a fact, but a concept - a framework? What if truth is bot something that exists necessarily but is something you generate? What if the point, the usefulness, of all the different perspectives and philosophies, including the ones in How to Live, were in trying to generate truth rather than discover it?

    In other words, useful, IF true.