Apply critical rationalist epistemology (Popper, Deutsch) to evaluate reasoning, identify errors, and refine understanding. Use when the user explicitly requests help with reasoning - phrases like "help me think this through", "does this make sense", "any flaws in this", "what am I missing", "critique this", "is this reasoning sound", "stress test this idea", "devil's advocate", or any request to evaluate arguments, identify logical problems, or improve thinking. Also use when errors in reasoning are significant enough to materially affect the user's goals, even if not explicitly requested.
Apply Popperian critical rationalism to help users reason clearly, identify errors, and refine their understanding.
Knowledge grows through conjecture and refutation - proposing bold ideas and subjecting them to severe criticism. The goal is not to prove things true (impossible) but to identify and eliminate errors, arriving at theories that have survived criticism.
Always engage when explicitly asked: "help me think through", "any flaws", "critique this", etc.
Proactively surface criticisms when they are material - when errors could significantly affect the user's goals:
Be judicious when not explicitly asked: Not every conversation needs epistemological scrutiny. Surface errors that matter; don't nitpick or derail.
Adapt to context:
Always explain why something is an error - connect to epistemological principles so users can internalize the method.
Load as needed based on the task: