We're constantly defining problems to solve them. But what if the very way we define our challenges is built on invisible foundations and quietly pre-selects its solution? What if the very definition is the problem?
Our frameworks for defining challenges are rarely neutral. They’re constructed on deep, often unquestioned, mental models. The very problems we frame are built on invisible assumptions that limit our vision.
Idealised Cognitive Models (ICMs): in cognitive linguistics, we call these frames Idealised Cognitive Models (ICMs); George Lakoff’s idea that our concepts ride on hidden background models. These models are "idealised" because they represent oversimplified versions of reality that highlight certain features while suppressing others. They are cognitive shortcuts that become embedded in language, design patterns, and organisational structures. The power of ICMs lies in its invisibility; its assumptions become baked into software architectures, corporate policies, and market categories until they appear natural and inevitable.
Take the concept of ‘Tuesday’, for example. ‘Tuesday’ only exists within a complex web of assumptions: solar cycles that define days, a rigid 7-day week structure where it's the third part in a linear sequence, sunrise/sunset boundaries and cultural agreements about time itself. Change any assumption (e.g., a 10-day week in revolutionary France), and "Tuesday" vanishes. Similarly, "weekend" superimposes a five-day workweek followed by a two-day break onto that calendar, assuming rest after labor.
In practice: invisible assumptions behind "USER" in tech industry
One of the most pervasive concepts in tech is “The User". This seemingly innocent concept shapes entire industries through its hidden assumptions. When we say "user," we think we're simply referring to people who interact with our products. But Lakoff would argue that "user" only makes sense within a complex Idealised Cognitive Model that carries profound assumptions about human behavior, technology relationships, and business dynamics. It idealizes humans engaging with technology as predictable, autonomous entities within a simplified model of interaction, drawing from metaphors of consumption, rationality, and individuality. By making these implicit assumptions explicit, we can understand how this conceptual framework has shaped entire industries and imagine alternative approaches to technology design that might serve human needs more effectively.
Invisible Assumptions behind the Concept of User in Tech
Subject-object relationship: This ICM positions people as active agents who "use" passive technological objects. This seems natural until you consider that this framework emerged from industrial tool-making, where hammers and screwdrivers were indeed passive instruments. But when we apply this mental model to social media platforms or AI systems, we miss how these technologies actively shape behavior, attention, and even identity.
The "user" ICM blinds us to the reality that modern digital systems are more like environments or ecosystems than tools.
Intentional, goal-directed behavior: This presupposes that people approach technology with clear objectives and rational decision-making processes. This assumption drives the entire field of "user experience design" and spawns concepts like "user journeys" and "conversion funnels." But behavioural economics shows us that most digital interactions are habitual, emotional, or driven by subconscious triggers.
The "user" ICM makes us design for a mythical rational actor while the real humans are driven by dopamine loops, social validation, and cognitive biases.
The Ownership Assumption: Perhaps most invisibly, the "user" ICM embeds assumptions about ownership and agency. When we say someone "uses" Facebook or "uses" Google, we're linguistically positioning them as having agency and control. But the reality is more like being a participant in someone else's system, or even being the product being sold to advertisers. The "user" framework obscures power dynamics and makes surveillance capitalism feel like consumer choice.
Temporal Assumptions: The ICM also assumes discrete interaction sessions. We think of people "logging in" to "use" a system and then "logging out" when done. This mental model made sense for early computing, but breaks down with always-on smartphones, ambient computing, and IoT devices. The "user" ICM can't adequately capture someone whose smart home is continuously collecting data, whose fitness tracker is always monitoring, whose car is perpetually connected to manufacturer servers.
The Business Impact
Technology Platform Design
The User ICM profoundly shapes technology development practices across multiple industries. In software design, the concept of the "user" creates a fundamental asymmetry between designers and those designed for, embedding particular power relationships into technological systems. The assumptions embedded in this ICM become materialised in architecture patterns, interface conventions, and data collection practices that prioritise certain forms of engagement while discouraging others.
Personalisation Systems
The entertainment industry's push toward AI-driven personalisation assumes users want adaptive experiences tailored to their preferences. This assumption ignores that people sometimes value serendipity, boredom, or challenging experiences that don't align with their established patterns. The streaming platforms, theme parks, and interactive experiences that prioritise personalised recommendations based on behavioural data implicitly assume that efficiency of engagement trumps other values like privacy, exploration, or shared cultural experiences.
Social Media Architectures
Platforms built around the User ICM tend to individualise collective experiences and quantify social relationships through metrics like friends, followers, and likes. This model assumes that sociality can be effectively mediated through individual consumption interfaces rather than designing for collective governance or community ownership. The resulting systems optimise for individual engagement metrics at the expense of social health and democratic values.
Business and Monetisation Strategies
Attention Economics
The entertainment industry's focus on immersive experiences assumes that deeper immersion leads to greater commercial value through longer engagement times and increased willingness to pay. This assumption drives investments in augmented reality, virtual reality, and interactive storytelling, but may overlook the value of distanced reflection, critical engagement, or non-immersive cultural experiences that don't generate the same revenue streams.
Data Extraction Models
The User ICM frames personal data as a natural byproduct of user engagement rather than as something owned and controlled by individuals. This enables business models based on behavioural surplus extraction—collecting more data than needed for service delivery to fuel advertising systems and AI training. The language of "user data" naturalises this extraction by implying that data is generated by the mere fact of using a service rather than through intentional corporate collection practices.