A system with many exceptions is often seen as
“unfinished,”
“unstable,”
or “poorly designed.”
That is why many AI and business systems try to reduce exceptions.
They add more rules.
They cover more conditions.
They eliminate edge cases.
But this very mindset
is what breaks the system.
What Happens When We Try to Eliminate Exceptions
Designing to reduce exceptions appears “smart.”
Automation rates increase.
Human involvement decreases.
Decisions become faster.
Yet in real-world operations, the same pattern always emerges:
Rules become bloated.
Unexplainable branches multiply.
“Unexpected” situations grow more severe.
This is not accidental.
Exceptions Are Not Distortions of the World
Let us overturn a key assumption.
An exception is not a distortion of reality.
It is evidence that reality is complex.
People do not act as expected.
Situations overlap.
Contexts shift.
As long as the world is alive,
exceptions will inevitably arise.
A high number of exceptions does not mean the world is broken.
It means the model has not caught up with the world.
The Misconception: “Exception = Failure”
When an exception occurs, systems often treat it as:
Error.
Abnormality.
Fallback.
In other words,
something that deviates from the main flow
and should be isolated.
But in reality,
an exception is precisely the moment when judgment is required.
Where Judgment Is Needed, Exceptions Appear
Recall what we have discussed before:
Judgment cannot be reduced to calculation.
Probability preserves ambiguity.
Responsibility must be borne by humans.
Where do these three converge?
In exception handling.
An exception accurately points to
the boundary where human involvement is necessary.
The More We Reduce Exceptions, the More We Hide Judgment
What happens when we “eliminate” exceptions through logic?
Judgment disappears into the code.
It becomes unclear who decided.
Responsibility grows ambiguous.
In other words,
a design that reduces exceptions
is a design that hides judgment.
Healthy Systems Let Exceptions Surface
What does a healthy system look like?
Exceptions are made explicit.
Boundary conditions are visible.
Human intervention points are clear.
Exceptions are where the system touches the real world.
The more of them that are visible,
the more honestly the system engages with reality.
What Does It Mean to Design With Exceptions?
Do not eliminate exceptions.
Give them a place.
This requires a shift in design perspective:
1. Treat Exceptions as a State, Not an Error
Not failure, but state.
Not abnormality, but “awaiting judgment.”
Not automatic termination, but pause.
An exception is a state where human judgment is required.
2. Surface Exceptions With Reasons
Why did it become an exception?
Which assumption failed?
What was missing?
An exception is also feedback to the design.
3. Route Exceptions to Dialogue, Not Just Logs
Display them on dashboards.
Explain them to decision-makers.
Reflect them in the next design iteration.
An exception is not merely data for training.
It is material for thinking.
More Exceptions Do Not Make AI “Smarter”
Let us state the reverse clearly.
Having many exceptions does not automatically make AI smarter.
But it makes visible
where humans are thinking.
That visibility is health.
Exceptions Are Questions Directed at the Designer
When an exception appears,
the one being questioned is not the AI.
Why was this decision automated?
Why was this boundary chosen?
Why was the human removed?
An exception is a question
that returns to the designer.
Summary
Exceptions are not failures.
Exceptions are evidence of complexity.
Exceptions reveal where judgment is required.
Eliminating exceptions erases responsibility.
The more exceptions surface, the more honest the system becomes.
Design in the age of AI is not about eliminating exceptions.
It is about preparing a place
where humans stand when exceptions arise.
That is the condition
for building systems that do not end as mere PoCs.
コメント