In Newtonian terms, and running with a Puritan orthodoxy, all effects must have discernible causes and a problem is merely the sum of the conditions required to lead to a solution. The solution is the destination, the desired end state, and it is everything.

In my work I am not formulating solutions any more. I am finding and taking paths. The difference between pathfinding and problem solving is that the latter assumes that there is an answer to the problem in the terms defined by the question, and that it is merely a matter of the ingenuity of the problem-solver to respond to those terms creatively in order to determine “the” solution or solutions.

Pathfinding is quite different. 

By choosing a path through a problem, you can exorcise what I call ‘the unspoken if’. The unspoken if is the condition placed on a solution that ratifies its ultimate (final) value as positive or negative, as successful or unsuccessful. When people conclude “that problem is unsolvable”, what they really mean is “that problem is unsolvable if we also want to achieve X.” By failing to acknowledge it they forget to question X, and as such responses to the problem conditions are seen as possessing a boolean value - positive (successful) or negative (unsuccessful).

A pathfinding process is very different. Choosing a path guarantees that you will travel along a continuum of moments creating a myriad of micro-products or micro-moments, any of which might have value in the terms of a different set of problem conditions. This means that pathfinding is a process of the generation of a thousand potential solutions, most of which will not be for the problem at hand. But there is a considerable difference between useless and valueless.