act-critical-thinking

name	act-critical-thinking
description	Challenges a conclusion with evidence quality, assumptions, alternatives, bias checks, and falsifiers. Use for decisions, analysis, recommendations, and factual claims where a plausible answer may still be wrong.

1. State the question, decision, or claim precisely and name its practical consequence.
2. Build an evidence ledger: distinguish observed facts and cited sources from inferences, assumptions, estimates, and unknowns. Do not invent details to complete a narrative.
3. Test the reasoning with credible alternative explanations, disconfirming evidence, base rates, and relevant stakeholder perspectives. Look for motivated reasoning, selection bias, ambiguous terms, and causal leaps.
4. Identify the minimum additional evidence or experiment that would most change the conclusion. State what would falsify the leading hypothesis.
5. Give a conditional, calibrated conclusion. Explain limits, confidence drivers, and what must remain undecided rather than converting uncertainty into false precision.