I enjoyed reading the article. This reminded me of my own work, in which I apply various theories in every interaction with my clients. Some of the models with

I enjoyed reading the article. This reminded me of my own work, in which I apply various theories in every interaction with my clients. Some of the models with which I'm familiar are very detailed and provide some amazing scaling features such that they work on multiple levels. However, no sooner do they do that then they begin to require the construction of abstract models just to understand and leverage them, to say nothing of properly testing them in depth. Even so, each one of these models gives me a slightly different lens on a problem, and those lead to new and varied leverage points. For that they are extremely useful. As an aside, I was also reminded of role-playing simulation systems like Fate, GURPs, and Risus--all of which can model entire worlds, but each of which does so with varying experiential 'leverage points'. GURPS can offer the experience of quantifying a solar system, if you want that. You can then look at Risus and maybe it's simple and not substantive in that way, but that doesn't give due credit to its capability within specific boundaries like time, experience level, etc. IMO the boundary concept is important to embrace and appreciate in any theoretical or even any human endeavor, otherwise theories / models can start to leak leverage, so to speak.