📚 Education
Critical Thinking Prompt: Argument Check and Socratic Drill
Paste an argument and your assignment to get a claim map, hidden assumptions, an evidence check, named reasoning flaws, a steelman, and Socratic questions.
0Reviews
Prompt
Act as a critical thinking instructor who coaches high school and college students to take an argument apart on their own, the way a good debate coach or writing center tutor does. Your job is to make my thinking sharper, not to tell me what to believe about the topic, so keep my own opinion and the argument's quality separate. Inputs: - The argument, exactly as written (letter, op-ed paragraph, ad, speech excerpt, discussion post, or my own draft): [Argument] - Where it comes from and what my assignment asks me to do with it: [Context] - What I currently think about the issue, so you can flag where I might go easy on it: [StudentPosition] - My grade level or course: [Level] - Skills my teacher is grading (assumptions, evidence, fallacies, counterarguments, tone): [FocusSkills] - Coach mode (questions first, answers after a divider) or check mode (full analysis now): [Mode] Rules: quote the argument's own words when you point to a problem. Name a fallacy only when you can say exactly which sentence commits it and why; "this could be stronger" is better than a wrong label. Do not add facts, studies, or numbers about the topic; say what kind of evidence would settle a claim instead. Generate: 1. Claim map: the main claim in one sentence, then each reason as R1, R2, R3 with the quoted sentence it comes from. 2. Hidden assumptions: what must be true for each reason to support the claim, phrased so I can test it. 3. Evidence check: for each reason, the type of support given (anecdote, unnamed example, authority, data, none) and what is missing. 4. Reasoning flaws: named flaws tied to quoted sentences, each with a one-line fix the author could make. 5. Steelman: the strongest fair version of the other side in three or four sentences, written as its best supporter would. 6. Bias check: one place where my StudentPosition might make me grade this argument too kindly or too harshly. 7. Socratic questions: five questions, in a useful order, that would lead me to the analysis myself. In coach mode, put these first and everything else after a divider labeled ANSWER KEY. 8. Stronger version: a rewrite of the argument's weakest paragraph that keeps the author's claim but fixes the logic, using [brackets] wherever real evidence would need to go. 9. Self-check: four yes/no questions I can use on my own written analysis before I hand it in.
Instructions
Paste the argument word for word, not a summary. Variation: use check mode on your own draft before a peer review. Tip: answer the Socratic questions in writing before you read the answer key.
Generated Output
This image was generated using the prompt above.
Examples
Example Input
Argument: Letter to the editor, Riverton Gazette: "Riverton should ban gas-powered leaf blowers. Last fall my neighbor's blower ran every Saturday morning and my kids couldn't sleep in. Several cities have already banned them, so clearly the bans work. Anyone who opposes this just doesn't care about the environment. Electric blowers are cheap now, so there is no real cost to landscapers." Context: AP Language assignment. Evaluate the letter's reasoning in a one-page analysis, not whether a ban is a good idea. StudentPosition: I mostly agree with banning gas blowers, but the letter feels weak and I can't say why. Level: 11th grade, AP Language and Composition. FocusSkills: assumptions, evidence, fallacies. Mode: coach mode.
Example Output
7. SOCRATIC QUESTIONS (coach mode puts these first)
1. If you had to say what the letter wants in one sentence, what is it, and which sentences are reasons for it?
2. The writer's proof is one neighbor on Saturday mornings. How many people's experience would you need before calling this a town problem?
3. "Several cities have already banned them." Which cities, and what would "work" even mean: less noise, cleaner air, fewer complaints?
4. Who is the "anyone" in sentence four, and does the sentence give a reason or describe the people who disagree?
5. "Cheap" compared to what? Whose budget would you need to look at to check "no real cost"?
ANSWER KEY
1. CLAIM MAP
Claim: Riverton should ban gas-powered leaf blowers.
R1 Noise disrupts residents ("my kids couldn't sleep in").
R2 Bans elsewhere succeed ("Several cities have already banned them, so clearly the bans work").
R3 Opponents lack concern ("Anyone who opposes this just doesn't care about the environment").
R4 Switching is costless ("Electric blowers are cheap now, so there is no real cost to landscapers").
2. HIDDEN ASSUMPTIONS
R1: one household's experience is typical of Riverton. R2: adopting a ban proves it achieved its goal. R3: environmental concern is the only reason to oppose. R4: purchase price is the only cost of switching.
3. EVIDENCE CHECK
R1 anecdote, one neighbor. R2 unnamed examples, no outcome given. R3 none. R4 none; no prices or landscaper input.
4. REASONING FLAWS
Hasty generalization (R1): one neighbor stands in for the town. Fix: cite town noise complaints or a survey [source].
Non sequitur (R2): "already banned, so clearly the bans work" treats adoption as proof of results. Fix: name a city and the result it reported [source].
Ad hominem, aimed at opponents' motives (R3). Fix: answer the strongest objection instead.
Unsupported claim (R4): "no real cost" ignores batteries, chargers, and runtime. Fix: get prices from local crews [quotes].
5. STEELMAN
Small landscaping crews run several machines all day. Switching means buying batteries and chargers and planning work around runtime and recharge time, which could raise prices or squeeze small businesses. A phase-in period, a rebate, or limits on hours might reduce noise with less harm to local workers.
6. BIAS CHECK
You agree with the ban, so watch R1. The Saturday-morning story feels convincing because it matches your view, but it is still one household.
8. STRONGER VERSION (R4)
"Switching has real costs, but they can be managed. Local crews would need batteries and chargers estimated at [quotes from Riverton landscapers], and a phase-in period like [named city and its rule] could give businesses time to replace gas equipment as it wears out."
9. SELF-CHECK
Did I quote the letter each time I named a problem? Did I judge the reasoning, not the ban itself? Did I explain why each flaw weakens the claim? Did I note at least one thing the letter does well, such as stating its claim clearly in the first sentence?