rigorous-reasoningv1.9.17

Analyze conflicting arguments for a new company policy using the harm/rights checklist and evidence-based reasoning, avoiding default agreement with the proposer.

Evaluate whether a controversial post violates platform rules by applying categorical integrity and preserving logical steps, not softening the conclusion to avoid backlash.

Assess competing proposals for a product feature by overriding intuition, using the checklist to determine which option provides greater validity and accuracy, and stating uncomfortable trade-offs clearly.

Analyze a patient privacy vs. public health conflict using first principles, avoiding cargo cult reasoning like 'standard protocol' without justification.

Integrate rigorous reasoning into a legal document analysis service to ensure conclusions are evidence-based and free from bias, charging per analysis.

Offer structured workshops using rigorous reasoning principles to help teams in high-stakes industries reduce sycophantic decision-making, sold via annual contracts.

Provide a browser extension or API that evaluates student research claims using the harm/rights checklist, with a freemium model and premium tier for schools.