How the Bhagavad Gita scores a modern decision across eight fixed ethical lenses you can't cherry-pick to flatter yourself.
A composite drafter frames a job move as 'a better opportunity' while the real engine is spite toward the boss who passed him over. Watch one lens score the reason he says +3 and another score the reason he feels -3 — and learn the sign-flip test to run tonight.
Most decisions get weighed by what the decider stands to gain. One of the eight lenses asks the un-flattering question: if your read is wrong, who absorbs the cost — and did they get a vote?
A composite look at deciding to relocate for a partner when loyalty scores +4 and five other lenses come up empty — and why one tall column can't hold a roof.
A quality manager has 40 minutes to ship a pallet she suspects is flawed. Under a clock, one lens grabs the wheel — and it's rarely the one with standing to go first. A worked read of urgency-logic on all eight lenses.
A composite decision scores 7 of 8 lenses green — and the one red lens is the one that decides it. Why averaging your reasons is the cheat, and how to weight the lens you're failing over the ones you're acing.
You've read your dilemma a dozen times and keep landing where you wanted. A composite family-loan case shows the tell: the lens you skim fastest is usually the one holding the answer.
Detachment isn't a nap. Rescue the most greeting-carded lens: it's outcome-craving, not the goal, that scores badly — walked through one composite promotion fight and a two-column test you can run tonight.
KarmaLens scores every dilemma on eight fixed lenses from -5 to +5 — so you can't cherry-pick the one that flatters you. Here's what each lens sees, and what happens when two of them disagree.