MINDSETWeeks to result

The Intersubjective Reality Test

Distinguish real constraints from collective agreements you can renegotiate

Problem it solves

limiting beliefs

Best for

Anyone who feels stuck in a system, role, or set of rules and wants to distinguish between genuine constraints and negotiable conventions. Entrepreneurs, reformers, and creative thinkers seeking to identify which rules can be changed.

Not ideal for

Situations where you need to focus on execution within established rules rather than questioning them. Also risky if applied without social awareness, since intersubjective realities are backed by real social enforcement even though they are constructed.

Overview

Why this framework exists

Harari distinguishes three levels of reality: objective (exists regardless of human belief, like gravity), subjective (exists in one individual's mind, like a personal preference), and intersubjective (exists because many people believe in it, like money, borders, or corporate hierarchies). Most of the constraints people experience as immovable are actually intersubjective: they are real only because enough people currently agree they are real. This framework trains you to classify the constraints you face by reality type and recognize that intersubjective constraints, while genuinely powerful, are fundamentally negotiable in a way that objective constraints are not.

Core principles

5 total
  1. Objective realities cannot be changed by changing beliefs; intersubjective realities can be.
  2. Intersubjective realities are not less real than objective ones in their practical effects; they coordinate billions of people daily.
  3. The leverage point for changing an intersubjective reality is not logic but collective belief shift.
  4. Most professional and personal constraints are intersubjective, not objective: job titles, market categories, industry norms, and career paths are all constructed.
  5. Recognizing a constraint as intersubjective does not make it easy to change, but it does make it possible to change.

Steps

4 steps
  1. List your current constraints
    Write down everything you believe limits what you can do in your work, career, or life. Include rules, norms, expectations, resource limitations, market conditions, and structural barriers.
  2. Classify each constraint by reality type
    For each constraint, ask: Would this exist if every human on Earth forgot about it overnight? If yes, it is objective (physics, biology, mathematics). If no, it is intersubjective (market norms, job requirements, industry standards, organizational rules). Most constraints will turn out to be intersubjective.
  3. Assess the enforcement mechanism of intersubjective constraints
    For each intersubjective constraint, ask: What happens if I act as though this constraint does not exist? Who enforces it? How strongly? Some intersubjective constraints have strong enforcement (legal systems, social ostracism) while others have weak enforcement (industry conventions, career path expectations).
  4. Target weakly enforced intersubjective constraints for change
    Focus your energy on constraints that are intersubjective and weakly enforced. These are the rules you can break, redefine, or ignore with relatively low cost and high potential upside. For strongly enforced intersubjective constraints, pursue collective belief change rather than individual defiance.

Checklist

Saved in your browser

Examples

1 cases
Challenging the four-year degree requirement

The requirement for a four-year college degree for professional employment is an intersubjective reality. It is not an objective fact that four years of college make someone competent; it is a collectively agreed signal of competence. Companies like Google, Apple, and IBM have begun recognizing this by dropping degree requirements for many roles. They identified the constraint as intersubjective and weakly enforced in their contexts, then acted accordingly.

OutcomeBy reclassifying the degree requirement as intersubjective rather than objective, these companies accessed a broader talent pool and demonstrated that hiring norms previously treated as immovable were actually negotiable conventions.

Common mistakes

2 traps
Confusing intersubjective with imaginary
Intersubjective realities are enormously powerful. Money, laws, and social norms have real consequences. Dismissing them as 'just made up' leads to reckless behavior. The framework is about understanding the nature of constraints, not about dismissing their power.
Trying to change intersubjective reality alone
By definition, intersubjective realities exist because many people believe in them. One person deciding that money is fictional cannot change the monetary system. Changing intersubjective reality requires shifting collective belief, which is a social project, not an individual one.

Origin story

How this framework came to be

Harari points out that entities like Google, the United Nations, and the US dollar feel as real as mountains and rivers, but they are entirely different in nature. A mountain exists whether or not anyone believes in it. The US dollar exists only because billions of people believe in it. This distinction, once understood, reveals that most of the barriers we experience in careers, organizations, and markets are intersubjective: genuinely powerful but fundamentally constructed, and therefore changeable by changing collective belief.

Source

Traced to primary
Source · BOOK
Sapiens
Yuval Noah Harari · 2014
Open source →

Related frameworks

Browse all Mindset →