When two schemas both hold after evidence review, build a conditional router — not a universal winner

Why This Is a Rule

Some schema conflicts don't resolve because both schemas are correct — in different contexts. "Trust your intuition" and "Follow systematic analysis" conflict as universal rules but resolve perfectly as conditional rules: "In experienced domains under time pressure → trust intuition. In novel domains or low-pressure situations → follow systematic analysis."

The conditional router converts a conflict into a context-dependent decision system. Instead of picking Schema A or Schema B as the universal winner, you specify the conditions under which each applies. The router does the metacognitive work that would otherwise require in-the-moment judgment: when these conditions are present, use this schema; when those conditions are present, use that schema.

This is more sophisticated than "just pick one" and more operational than "use judgment." The routing conditions are explicit and pre-committed, which means they fire automatically rather than requiring deliberation during the high-pressure moments when schema selection matters most.

When This Fires

• When two valid schemas conflict and evidence review hasn't resolved the conflict
• When both sides of a contradiction have genuine merit in different contexts
• After exhausting Steel-man both sides of a contradiction before resolving — an informed advocate must recognize each (steel-manning both sides) without finding a clear winner
• When you keep oscillating between two approaches depending on mood rather than conditions

Common Failure Mode

Building vague routing conditions: "Use intuition when it feels right and analysis when it doesn't." This is mood-based routing, not conditional routing. The conditions must be specific and externally observable: "Use intuition when: I have 5+ years in the specific domain AND time-to-decision is <10 minutes AND the stakes are reversible."

The Protocol

When persistent schema conflict doesn't resolve: (1) Accept that both schemas may be correct in different conditions. (2) For each schema, specify: "This schema applies when [specific, observable conditions]." (3) Verify the conditions are non-overlapping (MECE): no situation should trigger both schemas. (4) Write the router: "IF [conditions A] THEN [Schema A]. IF [conditions B] THEN [Schema B]." (5) The router replaces the conflict with a context-dependent system that uses both schemas appropriately.