A mental model is only useful if it matches the sequence of thoughts you actually have. Most "simplification frameworks" pretend you start with principles. You don't. You start with discomfort.
What you're looking at
A flowchart with two decision points and four outcomes. The red ellipse at top left is where you always start: discomfort with complexity, not principle. The first diamond asks whether you can name a specific thing to remove—most people can't, and that's the fork. The second diamond is empirical: you removed it, now does the system still work? The four endpoints are structurally different: two are acceptances (live with it, keep it gone), two are corrections (put it back, watch again).
Why I drew it this way
Most simplification models are radial or hierarchical—principles at the center, tactics radiating out. That's a lie. You don't consult principles first; you feel friction, then you act, then you learn. A flowchart is the only honest shape for this because it admits sequence and contingency. The red ellipse is offset left to break symmetry; the two outcomes on the right (inaction, correction) are visually heavier than the two on the left (the green box is the only reward, and it's small). I used only two accent colors: red for the emotional start and the failure case, green for the single success. Blue marks the cold moment of actual removal—the only part that feels like "method."
What it argues
Simplification is diagnostic, not principled. You don't simplify because you believe in minimalism; you simplify because something hurts, and you're testing whether a specific amputation helps. The diagram argues that most complexity persists not because people are cowards but because they can't name what to remove—the first diamond is the real gate, not the second. The second diamond (did it break?) is just verification. The position is that simplification is a loop, not a transformation: you'll be back at the red ellipse soon, with a different discomfort.
What I left out
I left out any box labeled "principles" or "philosophy" or "design values." Those are the things people add to make themselves feel systematic. The diagram starts with discomfort because that's what actually starts the process. I also left out any feedback loop from the green box back to the top—once something is simplified and it works, you don't revisit it. The loop is implicit in the fact that you'll encounter a new discomfort, not the same one. Showing that would have required a second red ellipse, and one is enough.