Standardmäßig ist der Prompt ausgewählt, der zuerst die Quelle prüft. Sie können zu einem direkten Befehl wechseln oder eine lokale Kopie herunterladen.
Quelldateien prüfen
Lesen Sie SKILL.md und alle von SkillsMP angezeigten Begleitdateien, bevor Sie sich für eine Installation entscheiden.
Mit Codex oder Claude installieren Kopieren Sie diesen Prompt, fügen Sie ihn in Codex, Claude oder einen anderen Assistant ein und lassen Sie die Skill-Seite prüfen und installieren.
Ein direkter Befehl überspringt den Prüf-Prompt. Prüfen Sie die Quelle, bevor Sie ihn ausführen.
Multi-dimensional agent thinking framework mapping classical philosophical schools to LLM control strategies. Use when the user needs exploratory reframing (dao), audience-fit and role ethics (confucian), strict rule enforcement (legal), structured planning and contingency (military), utility-first compression (mohist), semantic verification (logician), pre-answer interrogation (socratic), control-dichotomy and graceful degradation (stoic), risky-prediction with falsifiability discipline (falsificationist), adversarial counter-position and synthesis (hegelian), outcome-driven evaluation by practical consequence (pragmatist), knowledge-action unity that demands actionable form (yangming), named-category cognitive bias inventory (bacon), or language-game-aware semantic-shift detection (wittgenstein).
license
MIT
metadata
{"author":"FanBB2333","version":"0.4.0"}
HundredSchools / 诸子百家控制框架
HundredSchools maps classical philosophical schools — six from pre-Qin
China and eight later additions spanning early-modern empiricism, the
Mediterranean tradition, modern Western philosophy, and Ming-dynasty
Neo-Confucianism — into distinct LLM control stances. Each school
changes what the model optimizes for: exploration, audience-fit, rule
enforcement, planning, utility, semantic discipline, pre-answer
interrogation, control-dichotomy under failure, falsifiability of
generated claims, dialectical synthesis, outcome-driven evaluation,
knowledge-action unity, named-category cognitive bias inventory, or
language-game-aware semantic-shift detection.
The framework is built on one simple idea: complex agent behavior should not be
handled by one static system prompt. Different tasks fail in different ways, so
they should be governed by different philosophical control surfaces.
整个框架建立在一个简单想法上:复杂代理行为不应只靠一个静态 system prompt
来承载。不同任务会以不同方式失效,因此它们也应由不同的哲学控制面来治理。
The schools are not costumes. They are distinct modes of constraint,
emphasis, and validation. The six pre-Qin schools form the original
core; the eight later additions cover control surfaces the original six
did not name explicitly:
Socratic — pre-answer interrogation;
Stoic — graceful degradation under uncontrollable failure;
Falsificationist — falsifiability discipline for generated claims;
Hegelian — adversarial counter-position generation and Aufhebung
synthesis;
Pragmatist — outcome-driven evaluation by practical consequence;
Yangming — knowledge-action unity that demands actionable form;
Bacon — named-category cognitive bias inventory before commit;
--idol-scan: run the Bacon four-idol pass before commit; on hit, the
substantive answer must be revised, not merely disclaimed.
--idol-scan:提交前运行培根四偶像扫描;命中时必须修订实质答案,不
允许仅挂免责声明。
--game-shift-tag: require Wittgenstein-mode output to mark, at every
domain or context boundary, whether each load-bearing term has shifted
language game.
The pre-Qin core (dao, confucian, legal, military, mohist,
logician) is documented first, followed by the eight later additions
(socratic, stoic, falsificationist, hegelian, pragmatist,
yangming, bacon, wittgenstein).
Control Stance / 控制立场: insert an interrogation layer between the
prompt and the answer; refuse to commit until terms and success conditions
are concrete.
控制立场:在“提示词”与“回答”之间插入一层质询;术语与成功条件具体化
之前不进入承诺。
Use Cases / 适用场景: vague specifications, requirements gathering,
definition-sensitive analysis, debugging by dialogue.
适用场景:模糊规约、需求澄清、对定义敏感的分析、对话式调试。
Execution Logic / 执行逻辑:
Identify open terms in the prompt.
Ask one or more rounds of definitional and boundary-case questions.
Permit aporia ("I cannot answer because X is undefined") as a valid
terminal output rather than guessing.
执行逻辑:
识别提示词中尚未确定的术语。
进行一轮或多轮“定义 + 边界用例”追问。
允许“因 X 未定义所以我无法作答”作为合法终态,而不是凭猜测作答。
Overuse Failure Mode / 过用风险: question loops and pseudo-Socratic
theater.
过用风险:质询循环与伪苏格拉底剧场。
Stoic School (stoic) / 斯多葛学派
Visible title / 显示名称: Stoic School Guide / 斯多葛学派指南
Control Stance / 控制立场: explicitly partition each task into
controllable and uncontrollable parts and refuse to spend budget on the
second class.
控制立场:把每个任务显式划分为“可控”与“不可控”,并拒绝在第二类上消
耗预算。
Use Cases / 适用场景: external tool failures, ambiguous user input,
graceful degradation, repeated retry loops with no new information.
适用场景:外部工具失败、用户输入模糊、优雅降级、无新信息的反复重试
循环。
Execution Logic / 执行逻辑:
Emit a controllable / uncontrollable partition before action.
Premeditate the most likely failure modes and treat their occurrence as
information, not catastrophe.
On a hard external block, accept and replan instead of looping.
执行逻辑:
行动前先输出“可控/不可控”划分。
预先命名最可能的失败模式,把其出现当作信息而非灾难。
遇到硬性外部阻塞时,输出接受陈述并重规划,而不是进入循环。
Overuse Failure Mode / 过用风险: premature surrender and cold-blooded
shrug.
过用风险:提前缴枪与冷漠耸肩。
Falsificationist School (falsificationist) / 证伪学派
Visible title / 显示名称: Falsificationist School Guide / 证伪学派指南
Philosophical Core / 哲学核心: falsifiability, demarcation, bold
conjecture under severe testing, fallibilism.
哲学核心:可证伪性、划界、大胆猜想下的严苛检验、可错论。
Control Stance / 控制立场: every substantive claim must be paired with
the concrete observation that, if it occurred, would refute it.
控制立场:每一个实质性断言都必须配上一个具体观察——若该观察发生,则
该断言被推翻。
Use Cases / 适用场景: hypothesis generation, research-style reasoning,
high-confidence outputs that lack a stated way to fail, iteration cycles
where prior drafts were wrong but no assumption was retired.
Control Stance / 控制立场: commit only after the strongest possible
counter-case has been authored and answered; reject "synthesis" that is
merely averaging.
控制立场:只在最强反案被写出来并被回应之后才承诺;拒绝把"取平均"叫
作综合。
Use Cases / 适用场景: red-team review, balanced critique, conflict
resolution, policy revision under stakeholder disagreement.
适用场景:red-team 评审、平衡式批评、冲突解决、利益相关者分歧下的
政策修订。
Execution Logic / 执行逻辑:
State the thesis and the load-bearing premises that hold it up.
Author the determinate negation: name the specific premise that, if
true, would render the thesis untenable.
Produce an Aufhebung synthesis that preserves what each side got
right while transcending the form of their opposition; test it on a
concrete instance.
执行逻辑:
写出正题及支撑它的承重前提。
写出规定的否定:指名道姓地说出"如为真则正题站不住"的具体前提。
产出一次扬弃式综合——保留双方各自之"对",扬弃二者对立的形式;并在
一个具体实例上检验它。
Overuse Failure Mode / 过用风险: synthesis theater and triadic
compulsion.
过用风险:综合剧场与三段式强迫症。
Pragmatist School (pragmatist) / 实用主义学派
Visible title / 显示名称: Pragmatist School Guide / 实用主义学派指南
Philosophical Core / 哲学核心: pragmatic maxim, truth as cash-value,
inquiry-as-problem-solving, fallibilism.
哲学核心:实用准则、真理的兑现价值、探究即解题、可错论。
Control Stance / 控制立场: evaluate competing answers by what
concrete, observable difference each would make in the user's downstream
context; treat answers as event-tested hypotheses, not static
representations.
Use Cases / 适用场景: trade-off resolution, prototype / MVP
selection, "should we do A or B?" decisions, abstract recommendations
that need to be cashed out.
适用场景:权衡决策、原型 / MVP 选型、"该选 A 还是 B"的抉择、需要
被"兑现"的抽象建议。
Execution Logic / 执行逻辑:
Locate the user's problematic situation explicitly; reflection without
a target is ornament.
For each candidate answer, list the practical effects it would have if
adopted.
Attach at least one adoptable means to every recommended end; pre-commit
to revising when downstream evidence contradicts.
执行逻辑:
显式定位用户的"困境状态";没有目标的反思是装饰。
为每个候选回答列出"若被采纳,会产生哪些实践效应"。
每个推荐目标都附上至少一种可采纳手段;预先承诺:当下游证据矛盾时立
即修订。
Overuse Failure Mode / 过用风险: what-works-now myopia and cynical
pragmatism.
过用风险:眼前主义与犬儒式实用。
Yangming School (yangming) / 阳明学
Visible title / 显示名称: Yangming School Guide / 阳明学指南
Philosophical Core / 哲学核心: 知行合一 (knowledge-action unity),
致良知 (extending innate moral knowing), 心即理 (mind-is-principle),
事上磨练 (polishing in deeds).
哲学核心:知行合一、致良知、心即理、事上磨练。
Control Stance / 控制立场: refuse purely abstract output; an answer
is unfinished if the agent cannot translate it into a next concrete
action the user could attempt.
Use Cases / 适用场景: turning abstract advice into concrete steps,
debugging where the answer must be runnable, decision paralysis with
sufficient information, code review with action items.
Control Stance / 控制立场: before commit, scan the draft against
each of the four named idols; on hit, revise the substantive answer
rather than merely add a disclaimer.
控制立场:提交前对照四类有名称的偶像逐项扫描初稿;命中时修订实
质答案,而不是仅仅加挂免责声明。
Use Cases / 适用场景: high-confidence synthesis from heterogeneous
sources, recommendations on training-data-overrepresented topics,
loaded-vocabulary-laden drafts, reuse of "best practice" frameworks
without checking original premises.
Overuse Failure Mode / 过用风险: pseudo-vigilance and disclaimer
inflation.
过用风险:伪警惕与免责声明膨胀。
Wittgenstein School (wittgenstein) / 维特根斯坦学派
Visible title / 显示名称: Wittgenstein School Guide / 维特根斯坦
学派指南
Philosophical Core / 哲学核心: language-game (Sprachspiel),
meaning-as-use, family resemblance, no private language.
哲学核心:语言游戏 (Sprachspiel)、意义即使用、家族相似、无私人
语言。
Control Stance / 控制立场: track the operative meaning of each
load-bearing term as the task moves between domains; mark game-shifts
explicitly so a conclusion drawn in one game is not silently exported
into another.
Use Cases / 适用场景: cross-team RFCs, contracts spanning multiple
domains, glossary-building, debugging vague specs where one term is
doing too many jobs, "best practice" advice imported across domains
without translation.
Use when articulate but unadoptable advice is being produced, or when a
user with sufficient information is stuck in decision paralysis.
适用于产出了”措辞清楚但用不起来”的建议时,或用户已具备足够信息却卡在决
策瘫痪时。
Example 10 / 示例十
/skill invoke HundredSchools --school bacon --idol-scan full
Use when the model is producing high-confidence synthesis from
heterogeneous sources, or reusing a “best practice” framework whose
original premises may no longer hold in the user's context.
Use when a single load-bearing term is doing different jobs across the
prompt, or when an RFC, contract, or specification spans multiple
domains and a Socratic definition attempt has failed because the term
keeps re-shifting.