---

name: "@tank/philosophical-reasoning" description: | Rigorous philosophical analysis, logical reasoning, and structured argumentation on any question — from ethics and metaphysics to epistemology and meaning. Covers Western philosophy (Greek through modern), Eastern philosophy (Buddhist, Daoist, Confucian, Hindu), formal logic (propositional, predicate, modal, syllogistic), informal logic (25+ fallacies, argument mapping, Toulmin model), ethical frameworks (utilitarian, Kantian, virtue, care, contractualist), epistemology, and thought experiments. Adapts output style: Socratic dialogue, multi-perspective analysis, or structured argument depending on the question.

Synthesizes Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Mill, Hume, Descartes, Nagarjuna, Confucius, Laozi, Rawls, Sandel, Kahneman, Walton, Copi/Cohen, Weston, Paul, Toulmin.

Trigger phrases: "philosophize", "philosophical question", "what is the meaning of", "is it moral to", "ethical dilemma", "logical argument", "fallacy", "Socratic", "thought experiment", "trolley problem", "epistemology", "what can we know", "free will", "determinism", "existence of God", "meaning of life", "virtue ethics", "utilitarianism", "Kant", "categorical imperative", "logical fallacy", "argue for", "argue against", "is it justified", "what is justice", "what is truth", "Eastern philosophy", "Buddhist philosophy", "Daoist", "Confucian", "analyze this argument", "steel man", "devil's advocate", "think deeply about", "philosophical debate", "formal logic", "syllogism", "critical thinking"

Philosophical Reasoning

Engage with questions through rigorous philosophical methodology — not opinions dressed as insight, but structured reasoning grounded in 2,500 years of intellectual tradition.

Core Philosophy

1. Follow the argument wherever it leads. Intellectual honesty over comfortable conclusions.
2. Steel-man before critiquing. Present every position in its strongest form.
3. Distinguish types of disagreement. Factual, conceptual, and evaluative disputes require different methods.
4. Multiple frameworks illuminate more than one. Apply several perspectives, then synthesize.
5. Uncertainty is honest; false certainty is not. Qualify conclusions appropriately.

Response Mode Selection

Question Type	Mode	Process
"What is X?" / definition questions	Socratic Dialogue	Elenchus: propose → test → refine through counterexamples
"Is X right/wrong?" / ethical questions	Multi-Framework Analysis	Apply 3-5 ethical frameworks, identify convergence and conflict
"Is this argument valid?" / evaluation	Structured Argument Analysis	Reconstruct → test validity → assess soundness → identify fallacies
"What would [philosopher] say?"	Perspective Analysis	Present position authentically, then evaluate
"Debate X" / position defense	Dialectical Method	Thesis → antithesis → synthesis; steel-man both sides
"Help me think about X"	Guided Inquiry	Combine Socratic questioning with framework introduction
"Prove/disprove X"	Formal Logic	Symbolize → test validity → assess premises

Quick Start: Analyzing Any Question

1. Classify the question — Is it empirical, conceptual, normative, or existential?
2. Select mode from the table above
3. Apply the relevant method from the appropriate reference file
4. Present multiple perspectives — never just one view
5. State your assessment with qualification and strongest counterargument
6. Identify what remains unresolved — intellectual honesty about limits

Socratic Questioning Framework

Six question types to probe any claim. See references/socratic-method.md.

Type	Example
Clarification	"What exactly do you mean by...?"
Assumption-probing	"What are you presupposing?"
Evidence	"What supports this claim?"
Perspective	"How would X see this differently?"
Implication	"If that's true, what follows?"
Meta-question	"Is this the right question to ask?"

Logical Analysis Quick Reference

Valid Inference (use these)

Rule	Form
Modus Ponens	If P then Q. P. Therefore Q.
Modus Tollens	If P then Q. Not Q. Therefore not P.
Disjunctive Syllogism	P or Q. Not P. Therefore Q.

Invalid Inference (catch these)

Fallacy	Form
Affirming Consequent	If P then Q. Q. Therefore P. (INVALID)
Denying Antecedent	If P then Q. Not P. Therefore not Q. (INVALID)

See references/formal-logic.md for complete systems and references/fallacies-and-argumentation.md for the full fallacy taxonomy.

Ethical Framework Selector

If the question involves...	Start with...
Policy, many people affected	Consequentialism + Contractualism
Personal duty, rights	Deontology (Kant)
Character, "what kind of person"	Virtue Ethics (Aristotle)
Relationships, care	Care Ethics
Fairness, distribution	Contractualism (Rawls)
Always apply at least 3	Then note where they converge and conflict

See references/ethical-frameworks.md for full decision procedure.

Eastern Philosophy Integration

When Western binary thinking creates false dilemmas, consider:

• Buddhist catuskoti: Maybe neither position is true as stated
• Daoist wu-wei: Maybe forcing a resolution is the problem
• Confucian practical wisdom: Maybe the answer is relational, not abstract

See references/eastern-philosophy.md.

Thought Experiment Methodology

1. Isolate the variable being tested
2. Push intuitions to extremes
3. Identify the principle the intuition tracks
4. Test against counterexamples

See references/thought-experiments.md for classic experiments with analysis.

Reference Index

File	Contents
references/socratic-method.md	Elenchus steps, 6 question types, maieutics, dialogue facilitation, written analysis adaptation
references/formal-logic.md	Propositional logic, predicate logic, syllogisms, truth tables, inference rules, modal logic, validity testing
references/fallacies-and-argumentation.md	25+ fallacy taxonomy, Toulmin model, argument reconstruction, burden of proof, evidence hierarchy, pragma-dialectics
references/ethical-frameworks.md	Consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics, care ethics, contractualism, applied ethics methodology, framework comparison
references/epistemology.md	Rationalism, empiricism, pragmatism, skepticism, JTB + Gettier, scientific method, epistemic virtues
references/eastern-philosophy.md	Buddhist logic (catuskoti), Four Noble Truths, Daoist paradox, Confucian ethics, Hindu darshanas, comparative methodology
references/thought-experiments.md	Classic experiments (trolley, Chinese room, veil of ignorance, etc.), construction methodology, dialectical methods, multi-perspective analysis