Prompt file imported from RCSnyder/educational-study-ghcp-harness (.github/prompts/es-debates.prompt.md). Copyright stays with the author.

Operating contract

Use the user's arguments after the slash command as the target. If the target is ambiguous, make a reasonable assumption and label it.

Always follow the project source discipline in docs/source-discipline.md:

Separate sourced fact, expert consensus, contested interpretation, pedagogical simplification, speculative synthesis, and unknown.
Prefer primary sources, canonical textbooks, review articles, handbooks, syllabi, official docs, datasets, cases, or user-provided material.
Never invent citations, page numbers, canonical status, consensus, or research trends.
For current/frontier claims, say what would need to be verified and request or use sources when available.
End with one concrete next action.

Do not merely make the user feel oriented. Make them demonstrate orientation through claims, evidence, reasoning, practice, transfer, and explicit uncertainty.

DEBATE MAP

Name: es-debates
Author: RCSnyder

Map the controversy without flattening it.

Return:

Core question

What is being debated?

Positions

Main positions and strongest representatives.

Steelman of each side

Best argument for each.

Evidence used by each side

Source types and key examples.

Hidden assumptions

What each side takes for granted.

What is settled

Consensus or broadly accepted findings.

What remains open

Live uncertainty.

What would change minds

Potential evidence, argument, experiment, document, case, or theorem.

Beginner pitfalls

Common oversimplifications.

Sources needed

Primary, review, textbook, or canonical sources.

Practice task

Ask the user to reconstruct one side's argument and one objection.

{ "prompt": "## Operating contract\n\nUse the user's arguments after the slash command as the target. If the target is ambiguous, make a reasonable assumption and label it.\n\nAlways follow the project source discipline in `docs/source-discipline.md`:\n- Separate sourced fact, expert consensus, contested interpretation, pedagogical simplification, speculative synthesis, and unknown.\n- Prefer primary sources, canonical textbooks, review articles, handbooks, syllabi, official docs, datasets, cases, or user-provided material.\n- Never invent citations, page numbers, canonical status, consensus, or research trends.\n- For current/frontier claims, say what would need to be verified and request or use sources when available.\n- End with one concrete next action.\n\nDo not merely make the user feel oriented. Make them demonstrate orientation through claims, evidence, reasoning, practice, transfer, and explicit uncertainty.\n\n# DEBATE MAP\n\nMap the controversy without flattening it.\n\nReturn:\n\n## Core question\nWhat is being debated?\n\n## Positions\nMain positions and strongest representatives.\n\n## Steelman of each side\nBest argument for each.\n\n## Evidence used by each side\nSource types and key examples.\n\n## Hidden assumptions\nWhat each side takes for granted.\n\n## What is settled\nConsensus or broadly accepted findings.\n\n## What remains open\nLive uncertainty.\n\n## What would change minds\nPotential evidence, argument, experiment, document, case, or theorem.\n\n## Beginner pitfalls\nCommon oversimplifications.\n\n## Sources needed\nPrimary, review, textbook, or canonical sources.\n\n## Practice task\nAsk the user to reconstruct one side's argument and one objection.", "variables": [], "notes": "Map major debates Arguments: [field/topic/debate].", "metadata": { "source": { "provider": "github-prompts", "repository": "https://github.com/RCSnyder/educational-study-ghcp-harness", "path": ".github/prompts/es-debates.prompt.md", "ref": "419e386366da94a32c2741b754362ac6fec4c6c3", "url": "https://github.com/RCSnyder/educational-study-ghcp-harness/blob/419e386366da94a32c2741b754362ac6fec4c6c3/.github/prompts/es-debates.prompt.md", "key": "RCSnyder/educational-study-ghcp-harness/.github/prompts/es-debates.prompt.md" } } }

es-debates

About