Compare Perspectives

Given a consequential question and a set of distinct lenses, preserve useful disagreement long enough to expand the frame, then form an integrated judgment without outsourcing the decision.

Perspective Selection

Prefer the user's established, persistent Perspective Council. Persistence lets the lenses deepen and become internalized over time.

If no council is supplied, use the smallest set of provisional perspectives that differ in values, worldview, time horizon, definition of the problem, or form of judgment. Do not assemble a decorative panel of prestigious names. Do not invent quotations, private beliefs, or certainty about a real person's view; distinguish interpretation from source-backed position.

Method

1. Frame the question and stakes. Make the decision or uncertainty visible without steering all lenses toward the same answer.
2. Engage independently. Let each perspective identify what it notices, values, assumes, protects, and fears before comparing it with the others.
3. Contrast. Locate actual conflict in assumptions, priorities, definitions, tradeoffs, or second-order effects. Preserve unresolved differences; do not average them into bland agreement.
4. Interpret the tension. State what becomes visible only because the views conflict, including blind spots in the original frame.
5. Integrate judgment. Decide what to carry forward, what to reject, and which tension should remain open. The final judgment belongs to the decision-maker, not the council.
6. Name uncertainty. Separate settled judgment from claims that need evidence or experience.