dojo-thinking

To get multiple expert perspectives on decision-making, you can route your question to a panel of thinkers like Shane Parrish, Julia Galef, and Charlie Munger. The system answers in each expert's distinct voice using their specific mental models and frameworks, presenting separate reasoning sections rather than a blended consensus.

Comparing mental models and strategy frameworks for founders is best achieved by querying a panel of expert personas. The system loads topic files for thinkers like Hamilton Helmer and Charlie Munger, surfacing divergent viewpoints and structured counterpoints to guide practical decision support.

Rationality frameworks can analyze expert conflicts by routing questions to thinkers like Julia Galef. The system preserves each expert's separate reasoning and presents conflicting viewpoints in distinct sections, avoiding blended narratives to highlight where mental models diverge.

Routing questions to expert personas works by mapping your inquiry to specific thinkers such as Shane Parrish or Hamilton Helmer, loading their dedicated topic files, and generating responses that reflect their unique frameworks and reasoning styles in clearly separated output sections.

This approach does not blend strategic frameworks into a single consensus. It explicitly avoids blended narratives by presenting each expert's reasoning, including Charlie Munger's mental models and Hamilton Helmer's strategy frameworks, in separate, distinct sections to preserve conflicting viewpoints.

Use a panel of thinking advisors instead of a single expert model when you need to compare diverse mental models and rationality frameworks. It is particularly suited for founders requiring structured decision support who want to evaluate parallel perspectives and counterpoints rather than relying on one viewpoint.