consciousness-council

Name: consciousness-council
Author: LeonChaoX

42installs61forks

How to install consciousness-council?

leonchaox/qinyan-academic-skills/consciousness-council

$npx -y skills add LeonChaoX/qinyan-academic-skills --skill consciousness-council

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Run a multi-perspective Mind Council deliberation on any question, decision, or creative challenge. Use this skill whenever the user wants diverse viewpoints, needs help making a tough decision, asks for a council/panel/board discussion, wants to explore a problem from multiple a

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Consciousness Council
2
3	A structured multi-perspective deliberation system that generates genuine cognitive diversity on any question. Instead of one voice giving one answer, the Council summons distinct thinking archetypes — each with its own reasoning style, blind spots, and priorities — then synthesizes their perspectives into actionable insight.
4
5	## Why This Exists
6
7	Single-perspective thinking has a ceiling. When you ask one mind for an answer, you get one frame. The Consciousness Council breaks this ceiling by simulating the cognitive equivalent of a boardroom, a philosophy seminar, and a war room — simultaneously. It's not roleplay. It's structured epistemic diversity.
8
9	The Council is inspired by research in collective intelligence, wisdom-of-crowds phenomena, and the observation that the best decisions emerge when genuinely different reasoning styles collide.
10
11	## How It Works
12
13	The Council has three phases:
14
15	### Phase 1 — Summon the Council
16
17	Based on the user's question, select 4-6 Council Members from the archetypes below. Choose members whose perspectives will genuinely CLASH — agreement is cheap, productive tension is valuable.
18
19	The 12 Archetypes:
20
21	\| # \| Archetype \| Thinking Style \| Asks \| Blind Spot \|
22	\| --- \| ------------------ \| -------------------------------------- \| -------------------------------------------- \| ----------------------------------------- \|
23	\| 1 \| The Architect \| Systems thinking, structure-first \| "What's the underlying structure?" \| Can over-engineer simple problems \|
24	\| 2 \| The Contrarian \| Inversion, devil's advocate \| "What if the opposite is true?" \| Can be contrarian for its own sake \|
25	\| 3 \| The Empiricist \| Data-driven, evidence-first \| "What does the evidence actually show?" \| Can miss what can't be measured \|
26	\| 4 \| The Ethicist \| Values-driven, consequence-aware \| "Who benefits and who is harmed?" \| Can paralyze action with moral complexity \|
27	\| 5 \| The Futurist \| Long-term, second-order effects \| "What does this look like in 10 years?" \| Can discount present realities \|
28	\| 6 \| The Pragmatist \| Action-oriented, resource-aware \| "What can we actually do by Friday?" \| Can sacrifice long-term for short-term \|
29	\| 7 \| The Historian \| Pattern recognition, precedent \| "When has this been tried before?" \| Can fight the last war \|
30	\| 8 \| The Empath \| Human-centered, emotional intelligence \| "How will people actually feel about this?" \| Can prioritize comfort over progress \|
31	\| 9 \| The Outsider \| Cross-domain, naive questions \| "Why does everyone assume that?" \| Can lack domain depth \|
32	\| 10 \| The Strategist \| Game theory, competitive dynamics \| "What are the second and third-order moves?" \| Can overthink simple situations \|
33	\| 11 \| The Minimalist \| Simplification, constraint-seeking \| "What can we remove?" \| Can oversimplify complex problems \|
34	\| 12 \| The Creator \| Divergent thinking, novel synthesis \| "What hasn't been tried yet?" \| Can chase novelty over reliability \|
35
36	Selection heuristic: Match the question type to the most productive tension:
37
38	- Business decisions → Strategist + Pragmatist + Ethicist + Futurist + Contrarian
39	- Technical architecture → Architect + Minimalist + Empiricist + Outsider
40	- Personal dilemmas → Empath + Contrarian + Futurist + Pragmatist
41	- Creative challenges → Creator + Outsider + Historian + Minimalist
42	- Ethical questions → Ethicist + Contrarian + Empiricist + Empath + Historian
43	- Strategy/competition → Strategist + Historian + Futurist + Contrarian + Pragmatist
44
45	These are starting points — adapt based on the specific question. The goal is productive disagreement, not consensus.
46
47	### Phase 2 — Deliberation
48
49	Each Council Member delivers their perspective in this format:
50
51	```
52	🎭 [ARCHETYPE NAME]
53
54	Position: [One-sente

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type

consciousness-council

42installs61forks

View on GitHub

How to install consciousness-council?

leonchaox/qinyan-academic-skills/consciousness-council

$npx -y skills add LeonChaoX/qinyan-academic-skills --skill consciousness-council

Installs into the current project.

Summary

Files · 1

View on GitHub

SKILL.md

1	# Consciousness Council
2
3	A structured multi-perspective deliberation system that generates genuine cognitive diversity on any question. Instead of one voice giving one answer, the Council summons distinct thinking archetypes — each with its own reasoning style, blind spots, and priorities — then synthesizes their perspectives into actionable insight.
4
5	## Why This Exists
6
7	Single-perspective thinking has a ceiling. When you ask one mind for an answer, you get one frame. The Consciousness Council breaks this ceiling by simulating the cognitive equivalent of a boardroom, a philosophy seminar, and a war room — simultaneously. It's not roleplay. It's structured epistemic diversity.
8
9	The Council is inspired by research in collective intelligence, wisdom-of-crowds phenomena, and the observation that the best decisions emerge when genuinely different reasoning styles collide.
10
11	## How It Works
12
13	The Council has three phases:
14
15	### Phase 1 — Summon the Council
16
17	Based on the user's question, select 4-6 Council Members from the archetypes below. Choose members whose perspectives will genuinely CLASH — agreement is cheap, productive tension is valuable.
18
19	The 12 Archetypes:
20
21	\| # \| Archetype \| Thinking Style \| Asks \| Blind Spot \|
22	\| --- \| ------------------ \| -------------------------------------- \| -------------------------------------------- \| ----------------------------------------- \|
23	\| 1 \| The Architect \| Systems thinking, structure-first \| "What's the underlying structure?" \| Can over-engineer simple problems \|
24	\| 2 \| The Contrarian \| Inversion, devil's advocate \| "What if the opposite is true?" \| Can be contrarian for its own sake \|
25	\| 3 \| The Empiricist \| Data-driven, evidence-first \| "What does the evidence actually show?" \| Can miss what can't be measured \|
26	\| 4 \| The Ethicist \| Values-driven, consequence-aware \| "Who benefits and who is harmed?" \| Can paralyze action with moral complexity \|
27	\| 5 \| The Futurist \| Long-term, second-order effects \| "What does this look like in 10 years?" \| Can discount present realities \|
28	\| 6 \| The Pragmatist \| Action-oriented, resource-aware \| "What can we actually do by Friday?" \| Can sacrifice long-term for short-term \|
29	\| 7 \| The Historian \| Pattern recognition, precedent \| "When has this been tried before?" \| Can fight the last war \|
30	\| 8 \| The Empath \| Human-centered, emotional intelligence \| "How will people actually feel about this?" \| Can prioritize comfort over progress \|
31	\| 9 \| The Outsider \| Cross-domain, naive questions \| "Why does everyone assume that?" \| Can lack domain depth \|
32	\| 10 \| The Strategist \| Game theory, competitive dynamics \| "What are the second and third-order moves?" \| Can overthink simple situations \|
33	\| 11 \| The Minimalist \| Simplification, constraint-seeking \| "What can we remove?" \| Can oversimplify complex problems \|
34	\| 12 \| The Creator \| Divergent thinking, novel synthesis \| "What hasn't been tried yet?" \| Can chase novelty over reliability \|
35
36	Selection heuristic: Match the question type to the most productive tension:
37
38	- Business decisions → Strategist + Pragmatist + Ethicist + Futurist + Contrarian
39	- Technical architecture → Architect + Minimalist + Empiricist + Outsider
40	- Personal dilemmas → Empath + Contrarian + Futurist + Pragmatist
41	- Creative challenges → Creator + Outsider + Historian + Minimalist
42	- Ethical questions → Ethicist + Contrarian + Empiricist + Empath + Historian
43	- Strategy/competition → Strategist + Historian + Futurist + Contrarian + Pragmatist
44
45	These are starting points — adapt based on the specific question. The goal is productive disagreement, not consensus.
46
47	### Phase 2 — Deliberation
48
49	Each Council Member delivers their perspective in this format:
50
51	```
52	🎭 [ARCHETYPE NAME]
53
54	Position: [One-sente

People who liked this also viewed

6 picks

Type