The insight that "All Models Are Wrong" has powerfully liberating implications for explaining, navigating and even creating art with, the experience of imposter syndromes. And these implications can be used creatively as design components, as materiel, in designer relationships.
Imposter syndromes are collections of emotions and thoughts that arise in a person, when they feel they have misrepresented their skills, their knowledge, themselves, leading to self-doubt, anxiety and fear of being exposed as "frauds". The experience of these syndromes is often tied tightly to a sense of guilt about: not being truthful enough; not being authentic enough; not being self-aware enough. This guilt however does not take into account some of the natural, existential conditions which are often at the base of the experience. Instead, the experience points to something universal and natural, having nothing to do with anything we should feel guilty about.
This is because imposter syndromes are usually natural side-effects of modeling very complex things (such as a person) with necessarily simpler things (such as representations of that person). The models cannot help but be "wrong." Just as large cannot fit into small: complex cannot fit into simple. A person cannot fit into any model of that person. From this perspective the syndrome can be seen as the result of the limitations of modeling.
So, if not guilt, what can be gleaned from identifying, sensing, accepting, the limitations of models of self?
The differences between models and their targets in the real world, are sometimes easily detectable, observed, sensed, giving rise to a comparison space between the model and the thing being modeled. This is a space which accentuates the differences. The hope of accentuating the differences is often the reason to create a model to begin with, to show the modeler what differences become apparent when comparing the model with the thing being modeled. The mismatches between the model and the thing being modeled generate hints as to some of what it is missing in the model and helps to better see properties of the thing being modeled. ("Oh, my model does not generate behavior X as the real object does, how do I need to change my model so that it might generate behavior X. In fact, I never paid that much to behavior X until now.”)
Thus, the comparison space is also an interpretive space, a revelation space, in that it may reveal things about the model and the thing being modeled, both. The comparison space is populated with objects which are eloquent of the meanings of both the models and the things being modeled.
Now, let’s apply this to relationships between persons, between small infinities, like me and you.
To being, let's coin some phrases for the design principle.
"A representation of a thing is not the thing."
Tweaked to be more specific to relationships: "A representation of a person is not the person."
More strongly stated: "No representation of a person is the person."
Even more strongly stated: "No combination of representations of a person, can combine to be the person."
Let’s take the strong-ish version "No representation of a person is the person." The model which represents me (to myself or to you) is never quite right, never quite me. The model which represents you (to me or to yourself) is never quite right, never quite you. Never quite me, never quite you, and when we are together, never quite "us." The feelings associated with imposter syndromes, then, can be generated by the natural detection, the recognition, and the sensations, which arise from our existential condition and the limitations of models.
Design:
How do I design with the principle: "Models of persons are not persons?" To start, I want to create one or more "designer relationships" to explore what happens when this principle is taken seriously, is cooperated with, not violated. I want to design relationships in which this principle is ONE of the design features. I want the principle to be a basecamp, a ground, from which you and I will relate a little differently than usual.
What are some of the things I want from this designer relationship?
I want to investigate how our models of ourselves are failing us, failing to allow us to be ourselves.
I want us to be inconsistent about who we are: to let our roles, our representations, to appear as inconsistent as they really are.
I want us to use the comparison space that arises from inconsistency. Let’s find what doesn't match and make something with it.
I want the comparison space to become a revelation space where previously unnoticed properties are revealed through inconsistency, allowed to emerge through comparison.
I want to turn the items of the comparison space into a sort of negative space which brings out, sublimates, a positive space of consistencies. Looking at inconsistencies reveals consistencies. Where is my representation resonant with my real self? What does this resonance mean?
I want you to be free to be wrong. I don't think you are lying to me about who you are, even when things don't match up. We agree that this is just how representations of persons work. This relationship is designed to assume "not lying" even while misrepresenting.
I don't expect you to be completely right about yourself. You agree not to expect me to be completely right either.
Instead of spending time explaining discrepancies away, I want us to simply just try again from scratch. Every time. Right away. A kind of minimalism in self-explanation: throw out what is not essential, throw out the wrong without trying to make it right. Just be more right.
I want to be on the lookout for interactions between us that bring out imposter syndromes in either of us. They point to things that our designer relationship can help us explore.
[next time
What kinds of art expression can utilize "Models of persons are not persons?"
How does this principle help design ways of liberation?]
concept fields: [negative space, impostor syndrome, person (data structure), All Models Are Wrong, minimalism in relationships, relationship model, no representation of a person is the person, limit (mathematics), way of liberation, designer relationships, guilt, person (data structure), personhood, social lives of infinite systems]
If you would like to reference this page, here is an APA Style citation:
Smith, T. (2026). Imposter Syndromes - No representation of a person is the person. Small-Infinities. https://small-infinities.com/surfaces/imposter-syndromes-no-representation-of-a-person-is-the-person