How to Make Big Decisions

Big decisions don’t have to be mystical—they can be handled with a repeatable process that blends structured thinking with a final gut-level judgment. The core claim is that the best outcomes come when people (1) treat irreversible, hard-to-reverse choices with extra rigor and (2) use a five-step information-and-logic cycle before letting intuition make the final call. That matters because most people either overthink reversible choices or outsource judgment on high-stakes ones, then regret the result when it goes wrong.

The framework starts by sorting the decision itself. Drawing on Jeff Bezos’s distinction, reversible choices (like what to wear) can be tried with minimal downside, while irreversible or difficult-to-undo decisions—tattoos, college paths, PhD decisions, starting a business, and even marriage—require deeper attention. The algorithm is designed for the latter category: commitments that can lock in years of life and are costly to reverse.

Step one is clarity: define exactly what decision is on the table. Ali Alqaraghuli gives examples from career crossroads—choosing a major, deciding on a PhD, or choosing between a corporate path and graduate study—and points to Elon Musk’s early fork between continuing a Stanford PhD and joining the internet boom. Step two is inward hypothesis-building: assume there’s no outside input and reason from personal knowledge and logic. In Alqaraghuli’s case, the fear of boredom and the risk/reward tradeoff pushed him toward a PhD despite financial uncertainty; Musk’s own knowledge suggested the internet opportunity was the better bet.

Step three is targeted consultation: seek out experts who have achieved the outcomes you want, not random people whose backgrounds don’t match the problem. Alqaraghuli describes interviewing 31 NASA engineers during a JPL internship, repeatedly asking why they chose their paths and what they would do in his situation. Musk is cited as similarly relentless about asking mentors and professors, including discussions around deferring Stanford admission.

Step four is critical analysis of what experts say. Advice should not be accepted at face value; it must be tested against logic, first principles, and personal reasoning. Alqaraghuli criticizes the habit of outsourcing thinking to coaches or gurus, arguing that even authoritative guidance can be wrong for a specific person.

Step five compares the analyzed external input back to the original hypothesis. People should synthesize and “average” the guidance, then ask whether it confirms, challenges, or changes the initial assumption—often using reflective downtime like walks or late-night drives.

The “plot twist” is the final decision rule: intuition. The process ends with a gut feeling, but not a raw impulse. Intuition is portrayed as calibrated by prior reasoning, desire, and emotional priorities. Alqaraghuli argues that the mind and heart work together: do the intellectual work first, then follow the calm, right-feeling signal. He adds practical calibration tips—sleep, diet, and avoiding exhaustion—because poor rest can turn intuition into impulsivity. The payoff is fewer regrets: even when a choice is wrong, it remains the person’s own decision rather than a mistake made by deferring to someone else’s judgment.