pensamiento-critico

Evaluate argumentative texts using the 8 elements of thought and universal standards.

29|5|Updated Apr 25, 2026

Search Tags:#pensamiento-critico #análisis-argumentos #falacias #sesgos-cognitivos #steel-manning #reporte-crítico

Ready to run

npx skills add https://github.com/omixam/pensamiento-critico --skill pensamiento-critico

💬 Prompt for ChatGPT / Claude Chat▼

Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: pensamiento-critico
Source: https://github.com/omixam/pensamiento-critico/tree/main/skills/pensamiento-critico
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/omixam/pensamiento-critico --skill pensamiento-critico

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This skill helps users analyze argumentative texts with rigor by applying the 8 elements of thought and the universal intellectual standards, surfacing structure, gaps, and reasoning quality to support better thinking and decision making.

Core Features & Use Cases

Integrates the 8 elements of thought with the 9 universal standards to evaluate purpose, evidence, assumptions, inferences, and viewpoints.
Detects logical fallacies and cognitive biases to reveal weak spots and improve critical reading.
Produces a structured, didactic report with a verdict, synthesis, and explicit notes on limitations and non-neutrality when relevant.
Works on op-eds, essays, speeches, posts, and other argumentative texts, returning actionable insights for readers, editors, or educators.

Quick Start

Simply provide the text or attach a file; the system analyzes it and returns a structured critique ready for review.

Frequently Asked Questions about pensamiento-critico

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema

How do I analyze an argumentative text for logical fallacies and cognitive biases?▼

To analyze an argumentative text for logical fallacies and cognitive biases, provide the text or attach a file. The system evaluates the reasoning using the 8 elements of thought and universal standards, returning a structured report with detected fallacies, biases, and a final verdict.

What is steel-manning and how does it apply to evaluating an essay?▼

Steel-manning is the practice of presenting the strongest possible form of an opposing view before critiquing it. When evaluating an essay, the system applies this technique to ensure a fair assessment, synthesizing the argument's structure before delivering its critique and limitations.

How do I check if an op-ed meets universal intellectual standards?▼

To check if an op-ed meets universal intellectual standards, submit the text for analysis. The system applies 9 universal standards to evaluate purpose, evidence, assumptions, and inferences, surfacing reasoning gaps and delivering actionable insights for readers or editors.

Can I use this to find gaps in the reasoning of a speech or social media post?▼

Yes, you can use this to find gaps in speeches or social media posts. The system processes any argumentative text, identifying structural weaknesses and assumptions using the 8 elements of thought, and produces a didactic report with concrete recommendations.

What is the best way to break down the structure of an argumentative essay?▼

The best way to break down an argumentative essay is to evaluate it against the 8 elements of thought. This process reveals the argument's underlying purpose, evidence, and viewpoints, generating a structured synthesis that clarifies reasoning quality and limitations.

Are there limitations to automated critical thinking analysis for complex texts?▼

Automated critical thinking analysis has limitations with complex texts, including potential non-neutrality. The system addresses this by explicitly noting limitations and its own non-neutrality within the structured report, ensuring users remain aware of the critique's boundaries.