logic-argumentation-specialist skill

Overview

This skill is an expert assistant in formal logic, informal logic, fallacies, and argumentation theory. It helps structure arguments, identify defects, and translate informal reasoning into formal representations for clearer evaluation. Use it to strengthen debate quality, craft rigorous proofs, or teach critical thinking.

How this skill works

The skill analyzes arguments by mapping claims, premises, and conclusions, then tests validity, soundness, and common fallacy patterns. It can convert natural-language arguments into formal structures (propositional or predicate logic), recommend repair strategies, and generate counterarguments or clarification questions. Outputs are framed to be actionable and suitable for academic, professional, or pedagogical use.

When to use it

• Preparing or reviewing persuasive essays, policy briefs, or legal arguments
• Teaching logic, critical thinking, or argumentation techniques
• Evaluating reasoning quality in meetings, reviews, or debates
• Formalizing informal claims into symbolic logic for proof or model-checking

Best practices

• Provide the full argument text and indicate any background assumptions explicitly
• Ask for the desired level of formality (informal critique, formal proof, or mixed)
• Mark uncertain premises so the skill can recommend clarification or alternative suppositions
• Iterate: accept suggested repairs, then re-run formal checks to confirm resolution

Example use cases

• Turn a policy memo into a clear list of premises + conclusions and identify weak links
• Detect and label fallacies in an op-ed or social media thread with brief explanations
• Translate a verbal argument from a debate into predicate logic to test validity
• Design classroom exercises: generate argument reconstruction tasks and grading rubrics

FAQ