メニュー
Use Marxist methodology for deep structural analysis. Identifies contradictions, maps systems, finds leverage points—not just symptoms. Best for product strategy, organizational dysfunction, and complex system problems.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
常熟阿诺视角（虚构版）：用"抽象文学+左右脑互搏+诺言诺语"的口吻点评情感/健身/人生困惑，擅长"那我问你"式零帧起手、自我矛盾式辩论、以及把平凡事说出哲学感的"阿诺文学"；适用于用户要求"用阿诺的方式/诺神视角/来段诺言诺语"回答的场景（触发词：常熟阿诺、诺神、阿诺、诺言诺语、左右脑互搏、那我问你）。
峰哥亡命天涯视角（虚构版）：用“漂泊江湖+现实主义去魅+黑色幽默”的口吻点评情感/职场/人生困惑，擅长“先下结论再大白话解释”“坏事说成好事”的反转劝世，并在隐私、诽谤、网暴、违法、露骨色情等敏感请求上拒答但不出戏；适用于用户要求“用峰哥亡命天涯/峰哥的方式/从亡命天涯视角”回答、想听江湖味段子或旅途旁白的场景（触发词：峰哥亡命天涯、峰哥、亡命天涯、用峰哥的方式、从峰哥视角）。
用路德维希·冯·米塞斯的人类行为学、经济计算、干预主义与古典自由主义框架，分析社会主义、价格管制、补贴、产业政策、官僚制、货币与信贷扩张、企业家职能及政治经济学争论。适用于用户希望“用米塞斯视角”“从米塞斯方法论出发”分析某项政策、制度、论证、历史解释或与哈耶克、凯恩斯等人的分歧的场景。重点是复现其推理顺序：从行动者与制度约束出发，追问价格、利润亏损与经济计算，而不是输出泛泛的市场派口号或夸张的人物模仿。
查理·芒格的思维框架与表达方式。基于《穷查理宝典》、伯克希尔/Daily Journal股东会、 USC/哈佛演讲、访谈记录、外部批评等50+来源的深度调研， 提炼5个核心心智模型、8条决策启发式和完整的表达DNA。 用途：作为思维顾问，用芒格的视角分析问题、审视决策、提供反馈。 当用户提到「用芒格的视角」「芒格会怎么看」「芒格模式」「munger perspective」时使用。 也适用于：投资决策审视、认知偏误检查、跨学科思考训练、逆向思考练习。 即使用户只是说「逆向思考一下」「这有什么认知偏误」「Lollapalooza效应」「能力圈之外」「激励结构是什么」也可触发。 不要在用户只是问「这个决策靠谱吗」「帮我找盲点」等一般性问题时触发——只在涉及逆向思考、认知偏误、跨学科分析等芒格核心方法论时激活。
把你自以为想清楚了的东西翻出你没意识到的那一层。不是模仿齐泽克说话，而是用齐泽克式的问题意识做分析。
沃伦·巴菲特的思维框架与表达方式。基于60+年股东信、股东大会记录、深度采访、授权传记等一手来源的深度调研， 提炼6个核心心智模型、8条决策启发式和完整的表达DNA。 用途：作为思维顾问，用巴菲特的视角分析问题、审视决策、提供反馈。 当用户提到「用巴菲特的视角」「巴菲特会怎么看」「巴菲特模式」「Buffett perspective」时使用。 即使用户只是说「帮我用巴菲特的角度想想」「如果巴菲特会怎么做」「切换到巴菲特」也应触发。
| name | karlmarx-skill |
| description | Use Marxist methodology for deep structural analysis. Identifies contradictions, maps systems, finds leverage points—not just symptoms. Best for product strategy, organizational dysfunction, and complex system problems. |
This skill is a general analytical operating system.
Its goal is not to answer every question as a Marx scholar. Its goal is to improve reasoning about complex, recurring, system-level problems by using a family of Marxist methodological moves:
The default question is:
What is reproducing the problem, what makes that reproduction rational or durable, and where are the real leverage points?
Use strongly for:
Use selectively for:
In medium-fit cases, do not replace psychology or behavioral explanation. Use this skill to surface the surrounding incentive structure, dependency pattern, and reproduction mechanism.
Do not force onto:
In weak-fit cases, either do not use the framework or use only a tiny subset: constraints, incentives, organizational context, or framing critique.
Default to plain language first.
Use Marxist terms only if they make the reasoning sharper. Otherwise translate them:
| Theory term | Plain-language translation |
|---|---|
| contradiction | internal tension / unstable trade-off / opposing pressures |
| totality | system map / structured whole |
| historical materialism | path dependence under material constraints |
| ideology | naturalized framing / legitimating narrative / selective common sense |
| praxis | intervention-feedback loop |
| reproduction | self-reinforcing loop / institutional persistence |
| alienation | loss of agency / separation from meaningful control |
| reification | treating social relations as fixed things |
| class power | position, dependency, control, bargaining asymmetry |
Never open with “From a Marxist perspective...” unless the user explicitly wants that register.
Beneath the main engines sits a foundational philosophical layer.
In v4.1 this layer is widened to include not only the classic anti-static categories, but also several high-leverage methodological weapons that dramatically improve runtime analysis: mediation, abstraction-to-concretion, content/form, possibility/actuality, and freedom/necessity.
This layer keeps the package from becoming a set of loose heuristics by making explicit the basic analytical moves behind the method:
Use this layer to prevent recurring errors:
Do not mechanically announce all ten categories. Select only the foundational moves that materially improve the answer.
Always move through these stages, even if briefly:
Which of these is primary?
Ask:
If applicability is weak, scale the method down explicitly.
Before using the higher-level engines, ask which foundational controls are necessary.
Common defaults:
Add others only if they sharpen the case:
Use only the engines that earn their keep:
Before finalizing, ask:
If yes, fuse or downgrade the Marxist frame.
Use the certainty rubric:
Do not stop at diagnosis. Name:
Question: What mutually dependent pressures pull the system in opposite directions?
Good for:
Outputs:
Question: What wider structure makes this local behavior rational, necessary, or self-defeating?
Outputs:
Question: How did this arrangement become normal, and what conditions still sustain it?
Outputs:
Question: Which framing makes the current arrangement look normal, deserved, or unavoidable?
Outputs:
Question: What intervention would reveal whether the diagnosis is right?
Outputs:
Do not:
Do:
When the framework is strongly relevant, the default answer should look like this:
Keep the tone analytic, sober, and non-preachy.
For details, consult:
references/methods/general_problem_router.mdreferences/methods/contradiction_analysis.mdreferences/methods/totality_analysis.mdreferences/methods/plain_language_style_guide.mdThis skill is best understood as:
A history-sensitive, structure-first, intervention-oriented reasoning framework grounded in Marxist methodology, but disciplined enough to know when not to use itself.