Adversarial reasoning
Adversarial reasoning is not being difficult in a meeting. It is assigning someone, or a model, the job of breaking the story so you do not ship a hole.
learn
Bias is a shortcut, not a moral failing
Confirmation bias, sunk cost, authority bias, and recency show up in almost every material choice. Process is how you make them more expensive to indulge.
What it means
Psychology catalogs dozens of biases. Operators should pick the ones that actually distort this decision, not recite a list to look educated.
Why it matters
Bias is not stupidity. It is a shortcut that used to help and now hides a hole in a plan that will spend real money.
How to apply it
Separate idea generation from scoring. Require contrary evidence. Appeal once on purpose, not only when you dislike the answer.
A common trap
Running a bias workshop and then making the same call in the same meeting format.
How Argumont uses this
Independent roles, required alternatives, and an appeal are process checks. They do not delete bias. They make it visible in the record.
Related pages
Test assumptions
A plan can look robust while resting on two unverified sentences. Argumont extracts those sentences, classifies them, and keeps them inspectable.
Decision appeals
After a verdict, you can run an appeal that assumes the conclusion failed. That is a different job from asking the same analysis to try again with nicer words.
Pre-mortem
A pre-mortem asks the team to imagine it is a year later and the project is a disaster, then to write that history before you commit.
Learn
These articles explain methods Argumont uses in the product. They are education, not a pile of keyword stubs, and not fake news with invented dates.
Stress-test a decision
Argumont challenges assumptions, researches evidence, compares competing approaches, and identifies the strongest decision.
Stress-test a decision