Why do many successful entrepreneurs emphasize "returning to first principles"?

Let's put it this way: you can think of it as two different ways of learning to cook.

The first is "analogical thinking," which is how most of us operate. We get a recipe that says: first, add oil; second, add scallions, ginger, and garlic; third, add meat... We follow the recipe step by step. The dish won't taste bad, but it's also unlikely to offer any surprises. We're simply replicating others' successful experiences.

The second is "first principles thinking." A top chef doesn't just memorize recipes. Instead, they'll ponder: What is the essence of what makes this dish delicious? Does it need high-heat stir-frying to lock in juices? Does it require acidic ingredients to tenderize the meat? Or a specific spice to provide a unique flavor? They break down the outcome of "deliciousness" into its most fundamental physical and chemical principles: temperature, pH levels, the Maillard reaction, and so on. By understanding these core truths, they can freely combine elements without relying on any recipe, creating entirely new, and even more delicious, dishes.

Turning to entrepreneurs, "returning to first principles" means running a business like a top chef cooks.

When an industry already has many established practices (like having many ready-made recipes), most people will think: "Oh, everyone else does it this way, so I'll do it this way too, perhaps just a little better in one aspect" (for example, replacing table salt with sea salt in a recipe might make it slightly better). This is "analogical thinking"—it's racing on a path others have already paved, making disruptive breakthroughs very difficult.

Entrepreneurs who emphasize "first principles," like Elon Musk, approach things entirely differently.

When he wanted to build rockets, everyone told him that rockets were astronomically expensive, costing tens of millions or even hundreds of millions of dollars to buy one. This was a conclusion based on "analogy." But Musk didn't think that way; he began to deconstruct the problem, returning to first principles:

1. What are rockets made of? He found they were merely industrial materials like aluminum alloy, titanium, copper, and carbon fiber.
2. How much do these materials cost on the market? He calculated that the material cost accounted for less than 2% of a rocket's total price.
3. So why are rockets so expensive? The conclusion was: because of intermediate processes, manufacturing techniques, and the "single-use" model, which led to exorbitant prices.

You see, through this deconstruction, he transformed the problem from "rockets are expensive" into "how to efficiently build reusable rockets using inexpensive materials." The essence of the problem changed, and the solution naturally became revolutionary—building rockets himself and ensuring they could be recovered and reused. This is how the story of SpaceX disrupting the aerospace industry began.

So, why do successful entrepreneurs emphasize this?

• To achieve true innovation: It helps you break free from conventional thinking, step outside existing rules, and do things others deem impossible but are actually feasible. You're not fighting for a slice of an existing cake; you're baking an entirely new one.
• To see the essence of a problem: In the complex and chaotic business world, it helps you cut through the fog, get straight to the core, and find that crucial leverage point that can "move a thousand pounds with four ounces."
• To build unshakeable conviction: When your business model is derived step-by-step from the most fundamental and undeniable axioms, your logic is incredibly robust. This gives you immense confidence, allowing you to persevere when facing doubts and difficulties, because you know you're not just blindly following trends.

Simply put, while others were thinking about how to make carriages faster and more luxurious, someone applying first principles thought: "The essence of travel is rapid displacement." So, they started with wheels and engines, ultimately creating the automobile. This is a "dimensional reduction attack."