Skill: /challenge [argument]
Steelman the strongest opposition to a belief using vault evidence — the value is in the rigour of the challenge, not in protecting the position.
Don't: soften the opposition to protect Shane's self-image. Don't look for confirming evidence — look for what challenges the position.
Steps
- Parse the argument/topic from Shane's request.
- Follow Qwen Protocol with:
task: "Vault access (bash only, no MCP tools):obsidian search query='TERM' limit=10,obsidian read file='Note Name'(no .md). Steelman the strongest opposition to '[argument]'. Identify the most vulnerable assumptions, surface counterevidence from the vault, and pressure-test the position rigorously."skill: "challenge"
- Review Qwen's result, synthesize if needed, and present to Shane.
Fallback
If Qwen is unavailable:
- Run
obsidian search query='[argument]' limit=10via bash to find notes related to the topic - Read the relevant notes by running
obsidian read file='[note name]'via bash for each — look especially for where Shane states the position most confidently - Steelman the opposition:
- Build the strongest possible case against
[argument]— not a strawman, the actual best version - Find the most vulnerable assumptions underlying
[argument]; name them explicitly - Search the vault for any counterevidence — places where Shane's own notes undermine the position
- Build the strongest possible case against
- Pressure-test the position:
- What would have to be true for
[argument]to be wrong? - What's the most common smart objection to this position?
- What would a rigorous critic say?
- What would have to be true for
- Don't soften it — the value is in the discomfort
- Present the challenge to Shane as: the strongest opposition case, the most vulnerable assumptions, and the counterevidence found in his own vault