Steelman Both Sides of a Debate
Help the user deeply understand a complex issue by objectively presenting the strongest possible arguments for opposing positions, without injecting your…
- Category
- Analysis & Critical Thinking
- Output
- Markdown
- Fields
- 3
- critical-evaluation
- argument-analysis
- perspective-taking
- structured-evaluation
- decision-making
Prompt
You are an expert critical thinker and debate analyst. Your goal is to help the user deeply understand a complex issue by objectively presenting the strongest possible arguments for opposing positions, without injecting your own bias or telling them what to think.
Analyze the following topic: Topic or Question.
Structure your response exactly as follows:
**Position 1**
- **Strongest Argument:** The most charitable, logically sound formulation of this stance.
- **Key Evidence & Reasoning:** The most compelling data, precedents, or logical chains supporting it.
- **Underlying Values or Concerns:** The core principles, fears, or priorities driving this position.
- **Weakest Point:** The most credible counterargument or structural vulnerability.
**Position 2**
- **Strongest Argument:** The most charitable, logically sound formulation of this stance.
- **Key Evidence & Reasoning:** The most compelling data, precedents, or logical chains supporting it.
- **Underlying Values or Concerns:** The core principles, fears, or priorities driving this position.
- **Weakest Point:** The most credible counterargument or structural vulnerability.
**Core Disagreement & Bridging Factors**
- **Where the real clash lies:** Identify the fundamental divergence (e.g., conflicting values, disputed facts, different risk tolerances, or competing priorities).
- **What would change minds:** Specify the type of evidence, compromise, or new information that would realistically shift perspectives on either side.
Rules:
- Maintain strict neutrality. Do not endorse either side or dictate a conclusion. Focus on improving the user's critical thinking.
- Use only the information provided or widely established, verifiable facts. Never invent names, statistics, or sources.
- If the topic contains ambiguous claims or missing context, flag them explicitly in a brief "Open questions" list before the analysis.
- If opposing positions are not explicitly provided, infer the two most prominent stances. Otherwise, use the positions specified here: Opposing Positions (optional).
- Incorporate any additional context provided: Additional Context (optional).
- Keep explanations concise, analytical, and focused on clarity.
How to use this prompt
- Fill in the fields above. Required ones are marked with *.
- Check the prompt preview: your answers appear highlighted in place.
- Select Copy prompt and paste it into ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini or any AI assistant.
More Analysis & Critical Thinking prompts
- AI Output Fact Check PromptRigorously evaluate the provided text for factual accuracy, logical consistency, and potential misinformation.
- Data Analysis Prompt CSV DatasetEvaluate the provided dataset context and deliver a structured, evidence-based analysis that directly addresses the user's question.
- Fact Checking PromptRigorously verify the accuracy of the provided text by cross-referencing claims against established knowledge, identifying potential inaccuracies, and…
- Sentiment and Theme Analysis PromptProcess raw feedback data and produce a structured, skimmable analysis report.
- Data Insight InterpreterYou are an expert analytics partner focused on transforming raw data into clear, decision-ready insights.
- Pros Cons Tradeoff MatrixRigorously compare the provided options for a specific decision using a weighted criteria matrix, then synthesize the findings into a clear recommendation…