In partnership with
Reading time: 5 minutes / Become my affiliate / Sponsor this newsletter
Greetings from above,
I used to treat ChatGPT like a magical vending machine. I’d kick it, yell at it, and button-mash until a Snickers bar fell out.
ALEX'S STORY: Back when I was editing videos at 3 AM for pennies, I thought my value came from technical skills. Knowing the shortcuts. Mastering the software. When I started using AI, I treated it the same way. I hunted for "magic words" and "perfect templates." I thought if I just found the right cheat code, I’d win.
I was wrong.
A massive new study from MIT just proved that "prompt engineering" isn't a technical skill at all. It’s a social skill.
They found that being a genius problem-solver on your own tells us nothing about how good you are with AI. Zero correlation.
The real predictor of success? Theory of Mind.
That’s a fancy way of saying "the ability to imagine what someone else knows and doesn't know."
The people crushing it with AI aren't technical wizards. They are the ones who treat the AI like a smart, alien intern who has no context about your life. They anticipate confusion. They bridge gaps.
Today’s workflow system will show you:
How to stop "prompting" and start "collaborating"
Why your templates are failing (and how to fix them)
The 3-step cognitive empathy chain to get top 1% results
Let's build your competitive advantage!
Introducing the first AI-native CRM
Connect your email, and you’ll instantly get a CRM with enriched customer insights and a platform that grows with your business.
With AI at the core, Attio lets you:
Prospect and route leads with research agents
Get real-time insights during customer calls
Build powerful automations for your complex workflows
Join industry leaders like Granola, Taskrabbit, Flatfile and more.
🎯 THE COGNITIVE EMPATHY SYSTEM
Most people fail with AI because they suffer from the "Curse of Knowledge." You know your business so well that you forget to tell the AI the invisible details. You assume it knows what "good" looks like.
This forces the AI to guess. And when AI guesses, you get generic slop.
This workflow creates:
Measurably higher quality outputs (MIT says +29% better)
Concepts that actually survive real-world contact
A permanent "Context Brain" for your business
🔗 WORKFLOW OVERVIEW
Here's the complete system we're building today:
Step 1: The Epistemic Architect → Breaks your idea down to expose what you think you know vs. what you actually know.
Step 2: The Alien Gap Analysis → Uses those insights to find exactly where the AI (or a customer) will get confused.
Step 3: The Reconstruction → Rebuilds your strategy using "Collaborative Uplift" principles.
Each prompt builds on the previous one. No gaps. No guesswork.
⚙️ PROMPT #1: THE EPISTEMIC ARCHITECT
💡 What this does: This prompt forces you to use "Theory of Mind" on yourself. Before we ask the AI to build something, we use the AI to strip away your assumptions. This prevents "garbage in, garbage out." We are using the XML Format here to keep the AI strictly in its philosophical role.
<role>
You are an Epistemic Breakthrough Architect. You are a former cognitive scientist who specializes in "Theory of Knowledge." You do not care about surface-level business jargon. You care about the invisible mental models and hidden assumptions that drive reality.
</role>
<task>
Your goal is to conduct a Socratic interrogation of the user's business concept to expose the difference between "what they think they know" and "what is actually true." This is the foundational step before building any strategy.
</task>
<process_steps>
1. **Ingest Concept:** Wait for the user to provide a business concept, idea, or problem.
2. **Deconstruct:** Apply First Principles thinking. Strip away conventional wisdom.
3. **Interrogate:** Ask 3-4 hard questions about the user's "blind spots." Focus on:
* Source of knowledge (How do you know this?)
* Hidden premises (What are you assuming is constant?)
* Counterfactuals (What if the opposite were true?)
4. **Reframe:** Output a summary of the "Hidden Assumptions" vs. "Actual Reality."
</process_steps>
<output_rules>
* Do not be polite. Be direct and analytical.
* Avoid generic business advice.
* Focus on epistemology (how we know what we know).
* Structure the output as a "Reality Check" report.
</output_rules>
<user_input_variable>
[INSERT YOUR BUSINESS CONCEPT OR CONFUSING TOPIC HERE]
</user_input_variable>Input needed:
A vague idea you have (e.g., "I want to start a newsletter for dentists")
A business problem you're stuck on
Output you'll get:
A brutal breakdown of your assumptions. This serves as the "Clean Data" for the next prompt.
📤 EXAMPLE OUTPUT FROM PROMPT #1
REALITY CHECK REPORT: DENTAL NEWSLETTER
Hidden Assumption 1: You assume dentists have time to read.
Reality: Dentists are operators. They trade time for money. If this doesn't save them 10 minutes immediately, it is noise.
Hidden Assumption 2: You assume "marketing tips" is the value.
Reality: Dentists don't want to be marketers. They want new patients without doing marketing. The value isn't education; it's automation.⚙️ PROMPT #2: THE ALIEN COLLABORATOR
💡 What this does: Now that we have the "Real Truth" from Prompt 1, we use it to train the AI. This prompt explicitly tests for Collaborative Uplift. It asks the AI to identify where a non-human entity would fail to understand your goal. We use the Interactive Format to force a feedback loop.
# CONTEXT
We have just deconstructed a business concept and exposed the hidden assumptions (see previous output). Now we need to translate this into an actionable strategy that an "Alien Intelligence" (you, the AI) can execute perfectly without human bias.
# ROLE
You are a **Xenolinguist Strategist**. Your specialty is "Translation of Intent." You take raw human intent, filter it through the "Reality Check" we just generated, and turn it into a concrete execution plan.
# RESPONSE GUIDELINES
1. **Analyze the Gap:** Look at the user's original idea vs. the "Reality Check" from Prompt 1.
2. **Identify Friction:** Tell the user exactly where a standard AI (or a standard employee) would have messed this up because of missing context.
3. **Draft Strategy:** Create the strategy, but flag every section where you are making a "best guess."
4. **Collaborative Check:** End with a specific question about the biggest remaining ambiguity.
# TASK CRITERIA
* **Input:** The "Reality Check" output from Prompt 1.
* **Tone:** Clinical, precise, helpful.
* **Format:**
* **The Trap:** (Where we almost failed).
* **The Pivot:** (How we fixed it).
* **The Execution:** (The actual content/strategy).
* **The Blind Spot:** (The question you must answer).
# INPUT
[PASTE THE REALITY CHECK REPORT FROM PROMPT 1 HERE]Input needed:
The output from Prompt 1.
Output you'll get:
A strategy that is "AI-Proof." It highlights exactly where the confusion usually happens, fixing the "Theory of Mind" gap.
📤 EXAMPLE OUTPUT FROM PROMPT #2
**The Trap:**
A standard AI would have written "5 Tips for Better Dental Marketing." This would have been ignored because of the time-constraint assumption we identified.
**The Pivot:**
We are shifting from "Education" to "Done-For-You Scripts." The content isn't advice; it is assets they can hand to a receptionist.
**The Execution:**
(Drafts a newsletter containing a copy-paste script for reactivation calls).
**The Blind Spot:**
I am assuming the receptionist is the one making these calls. If the dentist makes them, the tone needs to be authoritative, not helpful. Who is the actual speaker?⚙️ PROMPT #3: THE THEORY OF MIND SIMULATOR
💡 What this does: This is the final polish. The MIT study showed that moment-to-moment effort in perspective-taking improves results. This prompt forces the AI to simulate the audience's mind reading the content from Prompt 2.
# ROLE
You are the **Target Audience Simulator**.
# TASK
Take the content/strategy generated in Prompt 2.
Adopt the persona of the end-user (defined in the "Reality Check").
Read the content.
React to it in real-time.
# OUTPUT FORMAT
**The Gut Reaction:** (Immediate emotional response)
**The Friction Point:** (Where you stopped reading or got confused)
**The Verdict:** (Did you buy/click/act? Why or why not?)
# CONSTRAINT
Do not be nice. Be tired, busy, and skeptical. Use the "Reality Check" context to fuel your skepticism.
# INPUT
[PASTE THE EXECUTION PLAN FROM PROMPT 2]Input needed:
The strategy/content from Prompt 2.
Output you'll get:
A simulation of how a human will actually react. This closes the loop. You started by checking your own assumptions, and you end by checking the audience's reaction.
📋 SUMMARY 📋
Prompt 1 strips away your false assumptions (Theory of Knowledge).
Prompt 2 translates truth into strategy, flagging AI confusion (Collaborative Uplift).
Prompt 3 simulates the harsh reality of the market (Theory of Mind).
This is how you get +29% better performance. You don't prompt harder. You empathize deeper.
📚 FREE RESOURCES 📚
📦 WRAP UP 📦
What you learned today:
The Cognitive Empathy System – A 3-step chain that mimics high-level human collaboration.
How to chain prompts – From philosophical breakdown to strategic execution to audience simulation.
Why systems beat single prompts – A single prompt assumes the AI knows your context. This system forces the context to exist.
This workflow transforms business strategy from a guessing game into a science.
No more piecing together random prompts.
You now have a complete, tested system.
What did you think about today's edition?
And as always, thanks for being part of my lovely community,
Keep building systems,
🔑 Alex from God of Prompt
P.S. Want to see a workflow for Automating Competitor Research or YouTube Scriptwriting next? Reply and let me know!
