6 ms·
I've always wanted a better way to document and structure arguments/debates. Assertions can have supporting statements (as children), that can be further expan
by pknopf 6y ago
I've always wanted a better way to document and structure arguments/debates.
Assertions can have supporting statements (as children), that can be further expanded and evaluated.
This way, I can evaluate and discard branches, distilling an argument to what matters.
Would a tool like this help me?
- XFrequentist 6y agoLike this? https://www.rationaleonline.com/ https://www.rationaleonline.com/
- modeless 6y agoAnother one https://www.kialo.com/tour https://www.kialo.com/tour
- joshspankit 6y agoI really find Kialo to be awesome for focusing the random arguments that see:to happen so much online. There are basically zero duplications in arguments since there’s a spot specifically for each one. There are some things I would change, but I’m happy about the time and effort I’ve put in to the discussions there.
- ibn_khaldun 6y agoYou may be interested in Hypernomicon http://hypernomicon.org/ http://hypernomicon.org/
- fastball 6y agoI'm the cofounder of a startup[1] working on an app that might scratch your itch. We built a note-taking system around digital notecards instead of documents, and those cards can be both linked hierarchally with parent/child relationships (and unlike most other platforms a card can have multiple parents) as well as with inline markdown link-style linking that you'll find in many other apps / wikis / tools for thought. I definitely think the notecard format could be very useful for this use-case, as one card = one argument makes a lot of sense. [1] https://supernotes.app https://supernotes.app