epstemic-extraction_skill

Overview

This skill analyzes natural language texts to extract their logical anatomy according to Aristotelian and Objectivist epistemology. It identifies key concepts with essential attributes, converts claims into universal propositions, and maps how those propositions form structured arguments. The output is explicit, atomic, and designed for logical evaluation or reformulation.

How this skill works

The system scans text to find recurring terms and abstracts them into concepts with clear essentials (genus and differentia where applicable). It then identifies implicit and explicit universal propositions, resolving pronouns and splitting complex claims into atomic universal affirmatives or negatives. Finally, it groups those propositions into arguments, naming premises and conclusions and matching them to classical logical forms when possible.

When to use it

• Analyzing academic or philosophical texts for underlying logical structure
• Auditing policy documents or legal arguments for hidden premises
• Teaching logic, critical thinking, or formal reasoning with concrete examples
• Preparing rebuttals or strengthening an argument by exposing implicit claims
• Converting informal discourse into precise premises and conclusions

Best practices

• Provide complete passages rather than isolated sentences to capture implicit premises
• Keep source text in the original wording to preserve nuance, then allow the skill to resolve pronouns
• Expect universalization of claims; supply contextual scope if a claim is not meant universally
• Review extracted essentials and propositions for domain-specific technical terms and supply definitions when needed
• Use the argument mappings to test validity and identify missing premises

Example use cases

• Extracting concepts and premises from a policy memo to reveal unstated assumptions
• Turning a philosophical essay into a set of universal propositions for classroom analysis
• Evaluating a scientific claim by listing the concepts, universal premises, and the form of the supporting argument
• Rewriting an editorial into atomic premises and checking the syllogistic validity of its assertions