critical-analysis

# Critical Analysis Framework

This skill guides rigorous critical evaluation of claims, arguments, and research.

## Phase 1: Content Mapping

### Claim Extraction
Identify all claims in the material:
1. **Central claim**: The main argument or thesis
2. **Supporting claims**: Claims used to support the central claim
3. **Implicit claims**: Unstated assumptions
4. **Hedged claims**: Qualified or conditional statements

### Argument Structure Mapping
```
Conclusion (Central Claim)
     ↑
Premise 1 + Premise 2 + Premise 3
     ↑           ↑           ↑
[Evidence]  [Evidence]  [Evidence]
```

### Stakeholder Context
- Who created this content?
- What are their credentials?
- What are potential motivations/interests?
- Who funded the work?

**CHECKPOINT**: Confirm scope of analysis with user.

## Phase 2: Evidence Assessment

### Evidence Inventory
| Claim | Evidence Provided | Evidence Type | Quality |
|-------|-------------------|---------------|---------|
| [Claim] | [What evidence] | [Type] | [Rating] |

### Evidence Types Hierarchy
(Strongest to weakest)
1. Systematic reviews/meta-analyses
2. Randomized controlled trials
3. Cohort studies
4. Case-control studies
5. Cross-sectional studies
6. Case reports
7. Expert opinion
8. Anecdote

### Evidence Quality Markers
**Strong evidence**:
- Peer-reviewed
- Replicable methodology
- Adequate sample size
- Appropriate controls
- Transparent reporting

**Weak evidence**:
- Not peer-reviewed
- Vague methodology
- Small sample
- No controls
- Selective reporting

## Phase 3: Logical Analysis

### Deductive Validity Check
For deductive arguments:
- Are premises true?
- Does conclusion follow necessarily from premises?
- Is the logical form valid?

### Inductive Strength Check
For inductive arguments:
- Is the sample representative?
- Is the sample large enough?
- Are there counterexamples?
- How strong is the correlation?

### Common Fallacy Scan

**Relevance Fallacies**:
- [ ] Ad hominem (attacking person, not argument)
- [ ]