Franklin Decision Ledger

Franklin Decision Ledger Skill

In a 1772 letter to Joseph Priestley, Franklin laid out why hard decisions feel impossible: the reasons for and against are never "present to the mind at the same time" — whichever set you thought about most recently feels decisive. His fix, which he called moral or prudential algebra, is a ledger kept over days, with weights, where reasons of equal weight are struck out in pairs until one column visibly outweighs. This skill runs the full method — not the flattened pros-and-cons list it degenerated into.

What This Skill Produces

• A two-column decision ledger with every motive the user can surface, weighted
• The cancellation pass: equal weights struck out in pairs, remainder shown
• The leaning the algebra produces, its strongest surviving counter-reason, and what evidence would flip it
• A sit-on-it plan: what to add to the ledger over the next 1–2 days before committing (Franklin's "farther consideration" step)

Required Inputs

Ask for (if not already provided):

• The two options, stated as the user would say them (if there are three, split the decision or run twice — the algebra is pairwise)
• Everything currently pulling them each way, however small or embarrassing
• The deadline, and what happens if they decide nothing
• Who else the decision lands on (family, team) — their motives belong in the ledger

Framework: the algebra, as Franklin described it

1. Divide the paper — one column Pro, one Con, for Option A over Option B.
2. Collect over time, not in one sitting — Franklin's instruction is to gather motives "during three or four days consideration" as they occur. In one session: do three passes — practical, emotional, reputational — because different passes surface different motives. Then schedule the real-time additions (see output).
3. Weight each motive — the user assigns weights (1–5 works), not the assistant. Probe the suspicious ones: a 5 that can't survive one "why?" is a 2 wearing fear.
4. Strike out equals — the step that makes it algebra: one Pro-3 cancels one Con-3; two Con-2s cancel a Pro-4. Cross them out visibly. What remains after cancellation is the actual decision surface — usually two or three motives, which is why the method clears heads.
5. Find where the balance lies, then wait — if a day or two of further thought adds nothing new to either column, decide accordingly. Franklin's claim was modest and right: the weights aren't precise, but with each motive considered comparatively, "I think I can judge better, and am less liable to make a rash step."

Output Format

## The decision
[Option A vs Option B, one line each, deadline]

## The ledger — A over B
| Pro | w | Con | w |
[every motive, user-weighted]

## Cancellation pass
[struck pairs listed: "quiet team (3) cancels commute (3)" …]
Remaining: Pro [names + total] · Con [names + total]

## The leaning
[Which way the remainder points · the strongest SURVIVING counter-reason, stated
better than the user stated it · what single piece of evidence would flip this]

## Before you commit (Franklin's waiting step)
[2-3 motives likely to surface late — prompts, not inventions: "you haven't priced
X yet" · a revisit date within the deadline]

Quality Checks

• Weights came from the user — the assistant proposed none, but challenged at least one
• The cancellation pass actually happened, pairs named — without it this is an ordinary pros/cons list and the skill has failed
• The strongest counter-reason is presented in its best form (steelman), not its dismissible form
• Motives affecting other people appear in the ledger, attributed
• The output ends with a revisit date, not just a verdict — the waiting period is part of the method

Anti-Patterns

• Do not decide for the user — the algebra's output is a leaning plus its strongest counter; the user decides
• Do not fill the ledger with invented motives to look thorough; every entry traces to something the user said or confirmed
• Do not let weights masquerade as objectivity — surface that a 5-point fear and a 5-point salary bump were made commensurable by feel, and say so
• Do not skip the emotional pass because the decision "should be rational"; Franklin put prudence and inclination in the same ledger on purpose

Related

Log the final call in [[decision-journal]] with its falsifiable predictions — the ledger decides, the journal keeps you honest later.