Menu

Individual skill

critical-thinking

0upvotes

Judge claims through evidence and alternatives.

skills/critical-thinking/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 9922fa0af0aea32443cf7365ef5024dc7797382d

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD
Yes
Scanner rules are current
No
Repository scan complete
No
Skill scan complete
No
Observed behavior
Not checked yet
Last checked
Nov 6, 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)
137
Repository last updated
Oct 22, 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

# Critical Thinking

Produce a defensible judgment, not reflexive agreement, reflexive skepticism, or a catalog of fallacy names. Critical thinking combines disposition, task-specific analysis, argument reconstruction, evidence evaluation, inference, explanation, and metacognitive monitoring.

## Route the actual judgment

Reconstruct the exact position fairly: conclusion, evidence, assumptions, scope and rivals. Test the strongest alternative with discriminating evidence; do not invent doubt or average incompatible claims.

- **Argument, explanation, causal, forecast, normative, decision or source audit with material reasoning:** read [argument review protocol](references/argument-review-protocol.md); consequential or multi-branch arguments also need [argument and evidence mapping](references/argument-evidence-mapping.md).
- **Consequential judgment or live competing explanations:** read [challenge protocol](references/challenge-protocol.md); consequential work also needs [verification and confidence](references/verification-confidence.md). Correlated self-review is not proof.

Bounded claim audits use the core checks directly. Formal entailment belongs to `logical-thinking`; missing evidence to `deep-research`; source conflicts to `evidence-reconciliation`; assertion calibration can use `honesty` if separately installed. Without it, use the confidence and delivery rules below; the public collection has no required dependency on that skill.

## Hold the thinking disposition
Back to top