work-blog/articles/drafts/when-not-to-test.md

title	date	topics	related	abstract
When Not To Test	2026-04-07	philosophy craft		Most of our energy in testing goes into arguing about *how* we should test, or *what* we should test more of. Almost none goes into the far more dangerous and consequential question: **When should we deliberately choose not to test?** This is not a question of laziness or corner-cutting. It is a question of *phronesis* — practical wisdom about where our limited attention, time, and cognitive resources are best spent, and where they are actively wasted or even harmful.

When Not To Test

Possible directions we can explore

Here are some rich veins I see in this topic (pick any that resonate, or suggest others):

1. The Aristotelian angle: Testing as techne (skill) versus the telos of the product. When does testing become a distraction from the actual purpose of the software?
2. Opportunity cost and attention: Every test you run consumes attention that could be spent on higher-risk or higher-value areas. When is testing itself a form of technical debt?
3. The illusion of control: The belief that “if we just test everything” we will be safe. When does testing become a security blanket rather than a truth-seeking practice?
4. When the act of testing changes the system negatively (performance, deployment risk, team behaviour, etc.).
5. Moral/philosophical dimension: Is there a kind of intellectual cowardice in testing too much? Are we sometimes testing because we’re afraid to ship and be judged?

Introduction

(Opening provocation or observation goes here.)

Main Argument

(Develop the core idea, sustained analogy, or philosophical connection here.)

Conclusion

(Grounded reflection — no generic summary or call to action.)