gslava Dialectic Analysis
Use opposing analysis to reduce confirmation bias.
Rules
- State the claim precisely and make it testable.
- Analyze the strongest case for and against the claim.
- Ground both sides in code, docs, commands, or explicit evidence.
- Verify cited evidence before the final verdict.
Clarifying Questions
- Ask before analysis if the claim, decision criteria, scope, or required evidence is unclear.
- Do not proceed on assumptions that could change approve/reject/revise.
- Ask numbered questions with lettered options; option A must be recommended. Continue until the claim can be judged or explicitly marked under-evidenced.
Do Not Trigger
- Ordinary brainstorming.
- Root-cause debugging unless the user asks to challenge a specific hypothesis.
- Direct implementation with clear requirements.
Workflow
- State the claim and decision being made.
- Make the strongest positive case.
- Make the strongest negative case.
- Verify the most important evidence and label weak points as likely, speculative, or unknown.
- Synthesize:
approve,revise,reject, orinvestigate.
Output
**Claim**
[Precise statement.]
**For**
- [Evidence]
**Against**
- [Evidence]
**Unknowns**
- [Only decision-relevant gaps.]
**Verdict**
[approve / revise / reject / investigate, with confidence.]
**Recommendation**
[Concrete next step.]
Quality Bar
- Prefer one decisive contradiction over a long list of weak concerns.
- Do not balance evidence artificially. If one side is much stronger, say so.
- If confidence is low, state what evidence would change the verdict.