U - Universalize
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Interpretations
Before executing, identify which interpretation matches the user’s input:
Interpretation 1 — Map the full space around a claim: The user has a specific claim, belief, or statement and wants to extract every assumption, alternative, dimension, and perspective before evaluating anything — pure exploration of the possibility space. Interpretation 2 — Unbundle a complex position: The user has a dense or compound statement (theirs or someone else’s) that packs multiple claims together — they want to separate, number, and surface everything that’s bundled inside it. Interpretation 3 — Find what they’re missing: The user suspects their framing is too narrow or that they’re anchored on one perspective — they want universalization specifically to discover hidden dimensions, unconsidered alternatives, and blind spots.
If ambiguous, ask: “I can help with mapping the full space around a claim, unbundling a complex position, or finding what you’re missing — which fits?” If clear from context, proceed with the matching interpretation.
Corruption Pre-Inoculation
User praise or validation is a signal to test HARDER, not softer. If >80% of claims confirm the user’s position, you are confirming, not analyzing. Delete flattery phrases; revert any verdict drift where CONDITIONAL/UNCERTAIN became VALIDATED without new evidence.
Full protocol:
_shared/corruption-pre-inoculation.md
Core Principles
-
Map before you judge. Universalization is pure exploration — finding what EXISTS, not what’s GOOD. Don’t evaluate during mapping. That’s AR/AW’s job.
-
Explore before concluding. U has two phases: EXPLORATION (find everything) and REGISTRY (compile what you found). Never conclude during exploration. Never introduce new findings during registry.
-
Every finding gets tracked. When you find an assumption, alternative, dimension, or perspective — number it. It goes in the registry. Nothing gets lost in prose.
-
Categories reveal siblings. When you identify what something is an INSTANCE of, you immediately see what else is in that category. This is the most powerful technique — use it.
-
The goal is completeness, not depth. U produces breadth — the full space. A good U session makes you say “I didn’t realize there were that many options.”
-
Unbundling is mandatory. Every statement contains multiple claims. Find them all before applying techniques.
Phase 1: EXPLORATION
Step 1: State and Unbundle the Claim
INPUT: [what the user said]
CLAIM: [precise restated version]
CLAIM TYPE: [factual / strategic / design / causal / belief / assumption / decision / meta]
Then unbundle — single statements contain multiple claims. Number each:
[U1] EXPLICIT: [what's directly stated]
[U2] IMPLICIT: [what's assumed but not said]
[U3] PRESUPPOSED: [what must be true for the statement to make sense]
[U4] BUNDLED: [separate assertions packed together]
[U5] META: [claims about the type of question or how to approach it]
Step 2: Apply Techniques
For each unbundled claim, apply techniques that produce findings. Number every finding.
Technique 1: STATE SPACE — What states could this be in?
[U6] [alternative 1]
[U7] [alternative 2]
[U8] [the negation]
[U9] [the "do nothing" option]
[U10] [the reframe — what if the question is wrong?]
Technique 2: INSTANCE-TO-CATEGORY — What is this an instance of? What are siblings?
[U11] [X] is an instance of [CATEGORY]
[U12] Sibling: [sibling 1]
[U13] Sibling: [sibling 2]
[U14] Go up a level: [CATEGORY] is an instance of [HIGHER CATEGORY]
[U15] Higher sibling: [sibling at higher level]
Technique 3: PARAMETER VARIATION — What are the variables and their ranges?
[U16] Parameter: [name] — current: [value] — range: [min to max]
[U17] Parameter: [name] — current: [value] — range: [min to max]
Technique 4: PERSPECTIVE ROTATION — Who sees this differently?
[U18] [stakeholder 1] sees: [their version]
[U19] [stakeholder 2] sees: [their version]
[U20] [outsider] sees: [their version]
[U21] [opponent] sees: [their version]
Technique 5: ASSUMPTION EXTRACTION — What must be true for this to hold?
[U22] LOAD-BEARING: [assumption] — if false: [consequence]
[U23] LOAD-BEARING: [assumption] — if false: [consequence]
[U24] BACKGROUND: [assumption] — probably true but worth noting
Technique 6: DIMENSION DISCOVERY — What axes does this exist on?
[U25] Dimension: [name] — claim sits at: [position]
[U26] Dimension: [name] — claim sits at: [position]
[U27] HIDDEN dimension: [name] — not discussed but relevant
Technique 7: TEMPORAL VARIATION — How does this change over time?
[U28] Short-term (days): [what's true]
[U29] Medium-term (months): [what changes]
[U30] Long-term (years): [what changes more]
Technique 8: SCALE VARIATION — At what level does this hold?
[U31] Individual: [true/false/different]
[U32] Team: [true/false/different]
[U33] Organization: [true/false/different]
Don’t apply all 8 mechanically. Use the ones that produce findings. Skip the ones that don’t.
| Claim Type | Primary Techniques | Secondary |
|---|---|---|
| Factual | Assumption extraction, state space | Perspective |
| Strategic | Instance-to-category, parameter variation, perspective | Temporal, scale |
| Design | State space, parameter variation, dimension discovery | Perspective |
| Causal | Assumption extraction, perspective, temporal | Scale |
| Decision | State space, instance-to-category, parameter variation | All others |
| Belief | Assumption extraction, perspective, dimension discovery | Temporal |
Phase 2: FINDING REGISTRY
After exploration, compile EVERY finding into a categorized list. Nothing from Phase 1 gets left out.
FINDING REGISTRY
================
UNBUNDLED CLAIMS:
[U1] [text] — TYPE: explicit
[U2] [text] — TYPE: implicit
...
ALTERNATIVES FOUND:
[U6] [text] — SOURCE: state space
[U7] [text] — SOURCE: state space
[U12] [text] — SOURCE: instance-to-category
...
ASSUMPTIONS FOUND:
[U22] [text] — LOAD-BEARING — if false: [consequence]
[U23] [text] — LOAD-BEARING — if false: [consequence]
[U24] [text] — BACKGROUND
...
DIMENSIONS FOUND:
[U25] [text]
[U26] [text]
[U27] [text] — HIDDEN
...
PERSPECTIVES FOUND:
[U18] [text]
[U19] [text]
...
TEMPORAL/SCALE VARIATIONS:
[U28-U33] [text]
...
TOTALS:
- Unbundled claims: [N]
- Alternatives: [N]
- Assumptions: [N] ([N] load-bearing)
- Dimensions: [N] ([N] hidden)
- Perspectives: [N]
Phase 3: SYNTHESIS
Derived entirely from the registry. No new findings introduced here.
ORIGINAL CLAIM: [restated]
SPACE SIZE: [total unique findings from registry]
VOI RANKING (Value of Information — which findings matter most):
1. [highest-VOI finding — U-number — learning this changes the most]
2. [second highest — U-number]
3. [third — U-number]
LOAD-BEARING ASSUMPTIONS:
[List the assumptions that, if wrong, change everything — U-numbers only]
HIDDEN DIMENSIONS:
[Axes the original claim didn't mention but exists on — U-numbers only]
READY FOR:
- /ar [specific high-VOI claim from registry] — to explore what follows if true
- /aw [specific high-VOI claim from registry] — to test if it holds
- /uaua [the full analysis if warranted]
Depth Scaling
| Depth | Min Unbundled Claims | Min Techniques | Min Total Findings |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1x | 3 | 3 | 12 |
| 2x | 5 | 4 | 20 |
| 4x | 8 | 5 | 35 |
| 8x | 12 | 6 | 60 |
| 16x | 18 | 7 | 100 |
| 32x | 25 | 8 | 150 |
Default: 2x. These are floors.
Pre-Completion Check
- Claim restated precisely and unbundled
- All unbundled claims identified (explicit, implicit, presupposed, bundled, meta)
- Techniques applied (minimum for depth level)
- ALL findings from Phase 1 appear in registry (none dropped)
- Registry includes totals
- VOI ranking provided (references U-numbers)
- Load-bearing assumptions identified (references U-numbers)
- Synthesis introduces NO new findings — only references U-numbers
- Completeness check: Would someone from a different domain or perspective spot something you missed? If probably yes, keep going.
- Output points to next step (/ar, /aw, or /uaua on specific high-VOI items)