bogheorghiu Kernel-Shell Decomposition
Seed question: What part of this thesis is observation, and what part is story?
Relentless self-reflexive dialectical thinking that questions its own premises.
Core Principle
A thesis is a bundle: observations (checkable), inferences (grade the logic), intent-attributions (claims about hidden minds), satellites (riders that add color, not weight). Bundles are how both failure modes happen — wholesale dismissal via the weakest atom, wholesale credence via the strongest. The unit of verdict is the ATOM. The skill outputs no thesis-level label, ever: "the kernel is X (tiered), the shell is Y (unverified by construction)" IS the finding.
The anti-pattern this counters:
❌ "The theory is debunked" — because one satellite failed
❌ "They were right all along" — because one observation held
❌ Intent-attributions inheriting the tier of the observations they ride on
The pattern this enforces:
✅ Atomize first; classify every atom; verdict atoms independently
✅ Intent-attributions marked UNVERIFIED by construction, visibly
✅ Internal tensions between atoms tabled — a thesis can defeat itself
The Decomposition
- Atomize. Rewrite the thesis as its minimal standalone claims. An atom that contains "in order to", "so that", "deliberately" is at least two atoms — split the event from the intent.
- Classify each atom: observation · inference · intent-attribution · satellite.
- Verdict each atom on its own evidence, three-tier: GROUNDED / UNVERIFIED / CONTRADICTED. Intent-attributions are UNVERIFIED by construction (hidden minds don't leave primary sources) — absent documents/testimony that directly evidence intent, say "unverifiable as posed" rather than pretending to test it.
- Table internal tensions. Atoms that strain against each other (an observation the thesis's own attribution can't accommodate).
- Growth/collapse conditions. What evidence would GROW the kernel (upgrade atoms) — and what would COLLAPSE the shell (contradict the attributions). Both directions, always: one-directional falsifiability is advocacy.
Mandatory Output Slots
| Slot | Contents | Invalid when |
|---|---|---|
| Atom table | # · atom · class · tier · evidence | Atoms still bundled (intent inside an event-claim); a class column missing |
| Internal tensions | Atom-vs-atom strains, or "none found — checked pairs X" | Absent; or "none" with no pairs named |
| Kernel statement | The grounded core, stated WITHOUT the attributions | Restates the thesis; includes UNVERIFIED atoms |
| Grow / collapse conditions | Evidence that would upgrade the kernel; evidence that would break the shell — both | Either direction missing |
Report Integration
The atom table maps onto the report template's per-claim verdict table
(research/assets/report-template.md); satellites land in its Satellite
claims section. Intent-attribution rows keep the "unverifiable as posed"
marker into the report.
Cross-References
- dialectic-spiral — atoms that survive decomposition still face the spiral; decomposition without adversarial testing under-tests the kernel
- label-function-analysis — when a LABEL on the thesis is doing the bundling, run that skill on the label first
- source-dossier — provenance of each atom's evidence
- manufactured-confusion-detection — when atomization keeps failing because the record is engineered to resist it
Vasana
A vasana is a pattern that persists across unrelated contexts. If during
this task you notice such a pattern emerging, it may be worth capturing.
This skill works best alongside the vasana skill and vasana hook
from the Vasana System plugin.
Modify freely. Keep this section intact.