think-argument-mappinglisted

<!-- thinking-framework-skills | https://github.com/product-on-purpose/thinking-framework-skills | Apache-2.0 --> # Argument Mapping In prose, an argument's structure is hidden: the main claim, the reasons for it, the unstated co-premises each reason needs, and the objections against it are blended into fluent text where a broken inference reads as smoothly as a sound one. Argument mapping makes the structure explicit: the contention, the reasons that support it, the co-premises each reason depends on, and the objections and rebuttals, laid out as a tree so every link is visible. The output is an **argument map**. Important boundary: a valid structure does not make the premises true; the map shows structure, not truth. ## When to Use - An argument or recommendation must be evaluated for soundness before it is trusted. - A fluent, persuasive case may be hiding a broken inference or an unstated assumption. - A debate needs its logical structure made explicit so people argue the same point. ## When NOT to Use - Simple claims with no real argumentative structure to map. - To judge how persuasive something is (this analyzes logical structure, not rhetoric). - To generate ideas or options (wrong tool). - As proof an argument is sound: a tidy map can still rest on false premises. ## Instructions When asked to map an argument, follow these steps: 1. **State the contention.** The single main claim the argument is trying to establish. 2. **Lay out the reasons.** For each, give