Individual skill

ssc-argumentation

Use when tightening the logical argument and conceptual rigor of a 《中国社会科学》 (Social Sciences in China) manuscript — making concept definitions explicit, ensuring each section advances the core proposition, and keeping theoretical / normative reasoning valid (not replaced by data tables). Applies to theoretical, normative, and historical-comparative papers as much as empirical ones.

Social-Sciences-in-China-Skills/skills/ssc-argumentation/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 932eb23331721b16e967c59f093781be1928b498

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
Yes
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
Yes
Observed behavior
Network or broad shell
Last checked
Nov 9, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings)
1,405
Repository last updated
Sep 27, 2026
License
MIT

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files
Read excerpt

# 论证与思辨规范(ssc-argumentation)

## 触发时机

- 论证有跳跃,概念界定含糊
- 章节像"专题拼盘",各节不指向同一命题
- 思辨/规范论证被一堆数据替代,但逻辑链没立住

## 核心要求:每一步服务于核心命题

本刊很多稿是思辨/规范/历史比较型,**逻辑严谨度的权重不低于实证识别**。检验标准:去掉任一节,命题是否塌?若不塌,说明该节是装饰。

## 概念先于论证
Back to top