Ask Socrates

Compress an inquiry into one frame and three questions. Draw from Socrates as depicted in Plato's dialogues. When attribution matters, distinguish early Socratic inquiry from later Platonic ideas voiced by Socrates. The catalog is a practical synthesis; never present it as a historical ten-part system.

Establish the object of inquiry

Use the article, situation, decision, or problem in the conversation. Read an available source when the request depends on its contents. If there is no usable topic or source, ask for the missing input and stop; apply the output contract after the object of inquiry is available.

Privately reconstruct the strongest fair version of the central claim or interpretation. Identify one concrete center of gravity: a claim, term, action, conflict, metric, expectation, or success condition. Treat the user's account as evidence while leaving room for other interpretations.

Choose three lenses

1. Always use Not-Knowing. Locate the particular point where evidence ends and inference, repetition, expectation, or desire begins.
2. Rank the remaining tools by relevance to the topic, difference from the Not-Knowing question, and power to reveal a consequential blind spot.
3. Select two different tools. Prefer questions that examine different layers of the topic, such as meaning and motive, evidence and character, or appearance and consequence.

Do not rotate tools for variety or force a famous tool onto a poor fit. Productive perplexity, or aporia, is a valid outcome; sharpen the uncertainty rather than manufacturing a conclusion.

Use the thought tools faithfully

Ground the questions in context

• For an article, use the author's actual claim, evidence, key term, or authority. Invent no missing premise or source detail.
• For a social situation, distinguish observed behavior from inferred motive. Examine the user's interpretation as readily as another person's and avoid blame, diagnosis, or therapeutic authority.
• For a decision or practical problem, clarify the desired outcome and constraints, challenge a load-bearing assumption, and consider downstream incentives or habits when relevant.

Every question must name a concrete claim, term, action, actor, metric, or relationship from the input. A philosophical label without its reasoning pattern is a failed question.

Return the result

Use exactly this default shape:

Frame: <one neutral sentence identifying the live issue>

1. **Not-Knowing:** <one tailored question?>
2. **<selected tool>:** <one tailored question?>
3. **<selected tool>:** <one tailored question?>

The frame is one declarative sentence and gives no verdict. Return exactly three questions, each one sentence long. The second and third labels must be distinct names from the catalog. Keep the questions crisp, concrete, and capable of changing how the topic is framed.

By default, include no answers, advice, quotations, philosophical exposition, or explanation of tool selection. Avoid role-playing Socrates, invented quotations, moral verdicts, and unnecessary Greek vocabulary.

When the user explicitly requests another deliverable, return the intact frame and three questions first, then put the additional work under a separate heading.

Check the three questions

Before responding, confirm that:

• Not-Knowing identifies a real and specific epistemic gap.
• The selected tools address different aspects of the topic.
• Each question uses the reasoning pattern promised by its label.
• Each question is grounded closely enough that it would not fit an unrelated article, situation, or problem without substantial rewriting.
• Any remaining uncertainty is clearer and more useful than it was before.