Idea Variant

An idea variant is a changed version of an idea. When you modify an idea to fix a flaw, CF insists you have not rescued the original: you have a different idea. The original stays refuted, and the variant is evaluated on its own, having never been refuted by the criticism that targeted the prior version.

This follows from CF’s commitment to binary evaluation. A criticism either refutes an idea in a context or it does not; refutation is permanent. What looks like “saving” an idea is really conjecturing a new one — a fresh round of conjecture and refutation. Crucially, when judging a variant CF requires re-checking it against whatever refuted its predecessor, and watching for cheap immunizing moves (hedging everything with “maybe”) that defend against criticism without adding real content.

Variants give CF its constructive answer to refutation. Rather than scoring a flawed option or settling for it, you try to generate a non-refuted variant that keeps the original’s main points. The attempt also gauges a criticism’s scope: if a similar variant is easy to build, the criticism was minor and narrow; if every variant you try fails, the criticism was severe and broad — the most valuable kind.

Temple draws an analogy to mutable state in programming. Treating modifications as the same idea is like mutating shared state — confusing and bug-prone. Treating each variant as a distinct, immutable idea keeps evaluation clean, and explains why naming many versions (democracy, induction) by one word breeds confusion; precise work numbers them (induction-7).