|
Page Layout
Page history
last edited
by Mike 1 month, 2 weeks ago
Forum and Page Design
1. One Page Per Topic
- Each topic is given a dedicated page, such as "Trump's Intelligence."
- Beliefs about the topic are organized along a continuum. For example:
- For "Trump's Intelligence," beliefs might range from "Trump is Stupid" to "Trump is a Genius."
- Each belief on the continuum is assigned a number, such as -100% to +100%, to allow for structured comparisons.
- Example: "Trump is the Worst US President" (-100%) to "Trump is the Best US President" (+100%).
- This structure allows for a wide range of beliefs to be explored and compared logically, not just debated in extremes.
2. One Page Per Belief
- Each belief under a topic has a page, with all relevant arguments and evidence organized together.
- Similar ways of expressing the same belief are grouped using semantic analysis (e.g., grouping synonyms and ligated antonyms).
- Example: "Trump is not smart" and "Trump is dumb" would be combined to avoid duplication.
- Users can sort arguments and evidence related to a belief by:
- Similarity
- Date
- Author
- Quality
- Length
- Goal:
- To identify all the truly unique reasons to agree and disagree with each belief, creating a comprehensive analysis of each issue.
- By eliminating redundancy and isolating unique arguments, the system ensures the analysis is complete, not fragmented or repetitive.
3. Pros and Cons on the Same Page
- Each belief page presents pro and con arguments side by side, allowing users to see supporting and opposing perspectives in one place.
- Arguments are ranked by the performance of their pro/con sub-arguments, ensuring the strongest, most well-supported arguments appear first.
- This structure encourages critical evaluation of the content rather than subjective agreement or disagreement.
4. Linkage Scores
- Linkage Strength: Arguments are evaluated for how strongly they link to a conclusion. Specifically, the system addresses the question:
- "If the argument were true, would it necessarily strengthen (or weaken) the conclusion?"
- Example:
- The belief "We have global warming" might have a strong standalone score, but its linkage strength determines how much it supports a conclusion like "We should have a carbon tax."
- Purpose of Linkage Scores:
- This approach ensures the system evaluates the truth of an argument and its relevance and logical connection to the conclusion.
5. Cost-Benefit Analysis
- Each page includes tools to analyze the likelihood of costs and benefits associated with different actions or beliefs.
- Users can post pro/con arguments for:
- The probability of specific costs or benefits happening.
- The validity of stakeholder interests, especially those affected by the proposed costs or benefits.
- This feature allows for objectively analyzing potential outcomes and stakeholder impacts.
6. Enhanced User Interaction
- Users can contribute by posting arguments and evidence, subject to upvotes and downvotes for community feedback.
- However, the primary focus is always on weighing each belief's pro/con arguments and evidence.
- Conclusions are ranked based on the performance of their pro/con sub-arguments, not on popularity or emotional appeal.
- This approach ensures the system prioritizes objective evaluation over subjective preferences.
- The platform’s core question is always "What evidence supports or refutes this argument?" rather than "Which side do you agree with?"
Page Layout
|
Tip: To turn text into a link, highlight the text, then click on a page or file from the list above.
|
|
|
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.