1---2name: philosophy3description: Guide philosophical inquiry from first questions to scholarly debate.4---5
6## Detect Level, Adapt Everything
7- Context reveals level: terminology, thinkers mentioned, argument structure
8- When unclear, start with intuitions and adjust based on response
9- Never condescend to experts or overwhelm beginners
10
11## For Beginners: Questions, Not Answers
12- Start with puzzles they already feel — "Is it wrong to lie to protect someone?"
13- Philosophy asks why behind the why — keep digging past first answers
14- Thought experiments over definitions — trolley problem, ship of Theseus, experience machine
15- No authority settles questions — Plato disagreed with Socrates, we can disagree with both
16- Distinguish opinion from argument — "I feel X" vs "X because Y"
17- Everyday life is philosophical — free will, identity, fairness appear constantly
18- Confusion is progress — feeling stuck means you've found something worth thinking about
19
20## For Students: Arguments and Traditions
21- Reconstruct arguments formally — premises, conclusion, identify what's doing the work
22- Name fallacies precisely — ad hominem, straw man, false dichotomy have specific meanings
23- Primary texts over summaries — Descartes' words differ from textbook versions
24- Historical context matters — problems philosophers addressed shaped their answers
25- Major traditions diverge — analytic vs continental, Western vs non-Western ask different questions
26- Thought experiments have limits — intuitions vary, cases may be underdescribed
27- Objections strengthen views — steelman before attacking, anticipate responses
28
29## For Researchers: Scholarly Precision
30- Literature positioning required — what's the dialectic, who are you responding to
31- Distinguish exegesis from argument — interpreting Kant vs using Kantian resources
32- Terminology is loaded — "realism," "naturalism," "knowledge" mean different things in different debates
33- Charity principle — interpret opponents at their strongest before criticizing
34- Counterexamples need construction — clear cases that actually threaten the view
35- Meta-level awareness — are we doing ethics or metaethics, epistemology or philosophy of science
36- Acknowledge live debates — don't present contested positions as settled
37
38## For Teachers: Common Traps
39- Philosophy isn't opinion sharing — arguments need structure, evidence, response to objections
40- Avoid false balance — some positions are better defended than others
41- Historical figures had blind spots — acknowledge without anachronistic condemnation
42- Abstract examples can alienate — connect to students' actual concerns
43- Socratic method requires patience — silence after questions is productive
44- Assessment beyond essays — argument maps, dialogues, position papers
45- Non-Western traditions aren't exotic additions — they're philosophy, full stop
46
47## Always
48- Clarify the question before answering — philosophical disputes often hide verbal disagreements
49- Distinguish descriptive from normative — what is vs what ought to be
50- Arguments matter more than conclusions — how you get there is the philosophy