TL;DR: A Reddit user shared a long prompt that makes ChatGPT think like seven different minds (Einstein, Tesla, Freud, Jobs, Musk, Branson, da Vinci). It runs them separately, compares what they found, and ends with a three-step plan. The trick is that it asks the model to copy their thinking methods, not their personalities.
What the prompt does
You’ve probably seen the “act as Steve Jobs” prompt. It usually gives you a cheesy impression and not much else.
This one, posted by u/vadimkusnir on r/ChatGPTPromptGenius, is different in one important way. It says outright that this is not role-play. No historical speech, no fake dialogue, no caricatures. Each name is just a label for a thinking style:
- Einstein: first principles, testing assumptions
- Tesla: technology and systems intuition
- Freud: hidden motivations and psychological conflict
- Jobs: radical simplification and design clarity
- Musk: automation, scale, calculated risk
- Branson: market disruption and brand storytelling
- Da Vinci: connecting art, science and structure
Think of it as seven consultants with different specialties, not seven celebrities.
The four phases
Phase 1: Diagnosis. Each of the seven looks at your problem on its own, in 100 words or less. Each one has to say what the problem really is, which question should be reframed, and what everyone is missing. Keeping them independent matters. It stops the model from blending everything into one bland answer.
Phase 2: Synthesis. The model sorts what came out into three buckets. Shared insights (where they agree), productive tensions (where they clash), and orbital insights (a smart point only one of them raised). The prompt explicitly says not to fake agreement. The clashes are often where the best ideas are.
Phase 3: The solution. Exactly three steps, in order. Each step has to combine at least two of the seven viewpoints and name a concrete action, an expected result, and the principle behind it. It also says not to invent metrics. That one line cuts a lot of made-up numbers.
Phase 4: One-line principle (optional). A single statement of 20 words or less that sums up the new logic. A nice thing to pin above your desk, but skip it if you’re short on time.
Where it works and where it doesn’t
It’s built for open, messy questions where you’re stuck on how to even frame the problem. Output is capped at roughly 800 to 1,200 words, so you get a tight read and not an essay.
One commenter pointed out that the da Vinci slot feels overstuffed. His notebooks were chaotic, not a tidy framework, and forcing that into a step-by-step format may flatten what makes that kind of thinking useful. Fair point. If your problem needs more wandering than structure, tweak that instance or let it breathe.
Also keep in mind that this is a structure for reasoning, not a source of truth. The model is still guessing. The prompt helps by separating grounded observations from speculation, but you still have to check the plan against reality.
Use cases
- 🎯 Positioning a product or newsletter when nothing feels different enough
- 🎯 Stress-testing a business plan before you commit money to it
- 🎯 Figuring out why a team, class or community keeps hitting the same wall
- Choosing between two strategies when both look fine on paper
Prompt of the day (condensed)
The original is long. Here’s a trimmed version you can paste and adapt:
You are a council of seven reasoning frameworks: Einstein (first-principles abstraction), Tesla (technological foresight), Freud (hidden motivations), Jobs (radical simplification), Musk (scalable systems and risk), Branson (commercial disruption and brand), da Vinci (cross-disciplinary synthesis). Treat them as methods, not personalities. No impersonation, no fake dialogue.
Phase 1: Each framework analyzes my problem independently in 100 words or less: how it sees the problem, which question it would reframe, and what blind spot it spots.
Phase 2: In 150 words or less, list shared insights, productive tensions, and orbital insights (unique ideas the others missed). Don’t force agreement.
Phase 3: Give exactly three sequential steps. Each combines at least two frameworks and includes the objective, the mechanism, and the expected outcome. Don’t invent metrics.
Problem: [your problem]
Context and constraints: [your context]
For best results, be specific in the last two lines. Vague problems get vague councils.
Your turn
Run it on one real problem you’re stuck on this week, then compare the three-step plan to what you’d have come up with alone. If you change a persona or a phase and get a better result, I’d like to hear what you swapped. Steal it, break it, and make it yours.
A 7-Mind Prompt Framework to Tackle Complex Problems Using Einstein, Tesla, Jobs, and 4 Other Thinkers
by u/vadimkusnir in ChatGPTPromptGenius