identify-perspectives

To map contested viewpoints, enumerate the recognized camps in a debate and build a perspective scaffold capturing each camp's core claims, representative voices, and nearby variants. This prevents research from collapsing distinct positions into one vague summary.

A tension map distinguishes disagreements that can be resolved from irreducible conflicts that depend on different conditions. You need one when comparing policy choices, technical tradeoffs, or social debates where multiple credible viewpoints must be preserved before evaluation.

Camp enumeration separates recognized positions in a debate from invented or overly broad labels by requiring specific camp names, core claims, and representative voices for each position. This ensures only credible viewpoints are preserved for later research steps.

Yes, perspective scaffolding applies to technical tradeoffs, policy choices, and social debates where multiple credible viewpoints must be represented. It captures each camp's core claim, representative voices, and nearby variants for downstream comparison and source mapping.

The best way to cover missing viewpoints is to require missing-camps coverage during camp enumeration, explicitly checking for unrecognized positions before building the tension map. This ensures the perspective scaffold includes all credible camps before downstream research begins.

Research collapses distinct debate positions into a vague summary when you fail to enumerate named camps and build a perspective scaffold beforehand. Mapping contested viewpoints first preserves each camp's core claims and representative voices for accurate comparison.