From mind-skills
Stress-tests a philosophical argument by raising the strongest objections and constructing replies (rebut, concede-and-limit, or bite-the-bullet). Useful for writing or revising an 'Objections' section.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/mind-skills:mind-objections-and-repliesThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
At Mind, an argument is not finished when it is stated — it is finished when it **survives the
At Mind, an argument is not finished when it is stated — it is finished when it survives the strongest objection a competent opponent would raise. The referees are those opponents. The objection-and-reply dialectic is not a defensive appendix; at this level it is where much of the paper's value lies. A paper that pre-empts the best objection reads as decisive; one that ignores it gets rejected by it.
mind-thesis-and-argument). Steelman it: state the best version.For each objection, do exactly one of three things — and say which:
State the objection at full strength in the opponent's voice; a reply to a weak objection persuades no one and signals you missed the real one.
【Objection】the strongest version, in the opponent's voice
【Target】which premise / move it attacks
【Response type】rebut / concede-and-limit / bite-the-bullet
【Reply】the actual reason (not a restatement)
【Residual cost】what, if anything, the thesis now gives up
【Next】mind-conceptual-analysis-and-method
../../resources/external_tools.md — reference works for the standard objections in a debate../../resources/official-source-map.md — Mind's expert, triple-anonymous referee processnpx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin mind-skillsStructures a sharp thesis and explicit, valid argument for an analytic-philosophy paper. Use when you have an intuition but need a defensible argument with identified load-bearing premises.
Devil's advocate mode that surfaces the strongest objections to the user's position, starting with the most damaging flaw.
Generates devil's advocate critiques from methodological, theoretical, and practical perspectives to stress-test research claims before writing or submitting.