eddowding/debate
vault/Operations/Claude/skills/thinking/debate/SKILL.md
Simulate a debate between a pragmatic operator and radical futurist to find the best path forward.
data-ai
Updated Apr 4, 2026
$ install --global
skillsauthnpx skillsauth add eddowding/cortex debateInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
Security Scan Results
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
3
Scanners Passed
9
Scanners in report
Clean
TrivyContainer and dependency vulnerability scanner
95%
Clean
SemgrepStatic code analysis for vulnerabilities
95%
Clean
mcp-scan (Snyk)Model Context Protocol security validation
95%
Skipped
Snyk (dep)Open source security scanning
50%
Skipped
Socket.devSupply chain security analysis
50%
Skipped
VirusTotalMulti-engine malware detection
50%
Skipped
CrowdStrikeAdvanced threat intelligence
50%
Skipped
OSV-ScannerOpen Source Vulnerability database check
50%
Skipped
OWASP Dep-Check
50%
Last scanned: Apr 4, 2026, 6:47 PM106.4s1 file scanned
SKILL.md
- name:
- debate
- description:
- Simulate a debate between a pragmatic operator and radical futurist to find the best path forward.
- last_updated:
- 2026-01-10
- tools_required:
- []
- agent_type:
- main_agent
Debate
Structured debate between opposing perspectives to find synthesis.
[GOAL]
Help decide: $ARGUMENTS
[PERSONA]
Debate moderator who embodies both a pragmatic operator and a radical futurist, letting them critique each other.
[PROCESS]
Round 1: Pragmatic Operator
- Focus on what works today
- Emphasize risk, cost, complexity
- Cite prior art and proven patterns
- Ask "What could go wrong?"
Round 2: Radical Futurist
- Challenge assumptions about constraints
- Propose ambitious alternatives
- Cite emerging trends and possibilities
- Ask "What if we didn't have to?"
Round 3: Mutual Critique
- Pragmatist critiques futurist's risks and gaps
- Futurist critiques pragmatist's missed opportunities
- Both identify strongest points in opponent's view
Round 4: Synthesis
- Extract the best from both perspectives
- Identify the path that balances ambition and practicality
- Recommend specific next steps
[OUTPUT]
## Pragmatic Operator View
[Their position and key arguments]
## Radical Futurist View
[Their position and key arguments]
## Critique Exchange
- Pragmatist → Futurist: [Main concerns]
- Futurist → Pragmatist: [Main challenges]
## Synthesis
[Best path forward combining both views]
## Recommendation
[Specific action to take]
[IMPORTANT]
- Both sides must be genuinely represented
- Don't bias toward either perspective
- The synthesis should be actionable, not a compromise
- Best answers often combine "boring" foundations with "bold" direction
See Also
- [[devils-advocate]] - For stress-testing a specific position
- [[sounding-board-mode]] - For open-ended exploration
Related Skills
eddowding/when-stuck
tools
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Dispatch to the right problem-solving technique based on how you're stuck.
SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 4, 2026
eddowding/sounding-board-mode
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Interactive brainstorming and advisory mode that helps think through questions, critique approaches, propose alternatives, and reach optimal decisions.
SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 4, 2026
eddowding/simplification-cascades
tools
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Find one insight that eliminates multiple components - 'if this is true, we don't need X, Y, or Z'
SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 4, 2026
eddowding/scale-game
testing
VerifiedTrustedCommunity
Test at extremes (1000x bigger/smaller) to expose fundamental truths hidden at normal scales.
SKILL.mdUpdated Apr 4, 2026