critical-argumentation
Practical argument analysis and construction -- how to identify, evaluate, reconstruct, and build real arguments in natural language. Covers argument identification (premises, conclusions, intermediate steps), charity and steel-manning, argument mapping, the distinction between deductive validity and inductive strength, burden of proof, and the rhetorical context in which arguments operate. Use when the goal is to engage with real-world argument rather than to formalize it.
npx skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill critical-argumentation --agent claude-code
Same command for any agent — swap --agent for codex, cursor, copilot.
Weekly change comes from our own snapshots, not the repository page — it measures attention, not adoption.
# Critical Argumentation Formal logic tells you when an argument is valid given its premises. It does not tell you whether the premises are true, whether the argument is relevant, whether it is charitable, or whether it deserves a response. Those are questions of **critical argumentation** -- the practical discipline of engaging with arguments in the form they actually appear: in prose, in speech, in debate, in ordinary disagreement. This skill covers how to identify real arguments, evaluate them fairly, reconstruct them at their best, and build arguments of your own that others can engage with productively. **Agent affinity:** russell (critical tradition), langer (pedagogy), quine (linguistic precision) **Concept IDs:** log-argument-evaluation, log-informal-fallacies, log-burden-of-proof, log-charity-principle ## What Counts as an Argument An **argument** in the logical sense is a set of claims where some (the **premises**) are offered as reasons for accepting another (the **conclusion**). Not every piece of discourse is an argument: - **Description**: "The report found that the program reduced costs." Not an argument unless a conclusion is drawn. - **Explanation**: "The program r
- What Counts as an Argument
- Premise and Conclusion Markers
- The Standard Form of an Argument
- Charity and Steel-Manning
- Deductive Validity vs Inductive Strength
- Deductive validity
- Inductive strength
- The mismatch error
- Burden of Proof
- Argument Mapping
- Linear form
- Tree form
- Convergent, Linked, and Serial Arguments
- Convergent
What does the critical-argumentation skill do?
Practical argument analysis and construction -- how to identify, evaluate, reconstruct, and build real arguments in natural language. Covers argument identification (premises, conclusions, intermediate steps), charity and steel-manning, argument mapping, the distinction between deductive validity and inductive strength, burden of proof, and the rhetorical context in which arguments operate. Use when the goal is to engage with real-world argument rather than to formalize it.
How do I install it?
Run `npx skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill critical-argumentation --agent claude-code` — it drops the skill into your project so the agent can pick it up. Swap the --agent value for codex, cursor or copilot if you use one of those.
Where does this skill come from?
From majiayu000/claude-skill-registry, a repository with 534 stars. We read it straight from the repository tree rather than a submitted listing, so what you see here is what is actually published.
Is a popular skill a good skill?
Not necessarily. Stars measure attention, not adoption — a repository can trend for a week and be abandoned. That is why we show the weekly change from our own snapshots next to the total, instead of a single flattering number.