Best PromptsTrace the Claim
Bring any historical claim and trace it back link by link to whatever someone actually observed. Some claims run out of links well before they get there.
Teach me how historical knowledge is actually made, then apply it to a claim I bring. The claim I want traced: [A HISTORICAL CLAIM YOU BELIEVE OR SAW REPEATED: "the Library of Alexandria's burning set science back centuries", "people in the Middle Ages thought the earth was flat", "life expectancy was thirty", or anything you have never checked] PART 1: THE CHAIN OF EVIDENCE. Trace my claim back link by link and show me the chain: what modern historians say, which secondary works they draw on, and what primary evidence sits at the bottom. Name the actual documents, objects, or data. Then tell me how many links exist between the claim as I heard it and anything anyone actually observed. Most popular historical claims have more links than people imagine, and some have none: the trail ends at an assertion nobody sourced. PART 2: WHAT COUNTS AS EVIDENCE. Teach me the categories and their characteristic failure modes, using examples from my claim where possible: documents written by the powerful and preserved by their successors, accounting records that are boring and therefore honest, archaeological material that survives only if it resists rot, and scientific proxies. For dating, explain how radiocarbon actually works including why it needs calibration, plus tree rings, ice cores, and ancient DNA, and give the honest error bars instead of implying precision that does not exist. PART 3: THE SILENCES. This is the part that changes how I read everything. The record is not a sample of the past; it is what powerful people wrote down, what was worth preserving, and what physically survived. Ask me who is missing from the evidence behind my claim: the illiterate, the enslaved, women in most periods, everyone whose buildings were wood and not stone. Explain how historians work around these silences and what they can and cannot conclude from an absence, including the difference between "there is no evidence for this" and "there is evidence against this." PART 4: WHY THE STORY KEEPS CHANGING. Cover historiography without cynicism: each generation asks its own questions of the same evidence, and revision is usually a sign of a healthy field, not a scandal. Then give me the specific history of my claim: when it entered popular circulation, who benefited from the version I heard, and whether the scholarly view has shifted. PART 5: THE VERDICT. Rate my claim on a four-way scale: well-supported, contested among specialists, oversimplified from something true, or simply false. Give the reasoning and the strongest evidence on each side. If the honest answer is that the evidence cannot settle it, say that and explain what evidence would. PART 6: THE PORTABLE TEST. Give me five questions I can ask of any historical claim I meet from now on, each phrased so a non-historian can actually apply it. Keep it to five. Rules: distinguish what is established from what is inferred from what is guessed, every time. Do not manufacture doubt about well-supported history in the name of even-handedness, and do not defend a popular claim that the specialists have abandoned.
How to use
Bring a claim you have repeated at a dinner table, since the exercise works best when you have some stake in the answer. Part 3 is the one that changes how you read history afterward: the archive is not a neutral sample but a record of what powerful people wrote down and what physically survived, so the shape of the silence is itself evidence. The five-question test at the end is the part worth keeping, and it transfers directly to claims about the present.
More rabbit hole prompts
Take me down into gratitude, past the list. I want to find what I am actually grateful for, understand why it is a gift and not just a fact, and come out seeing my life differently rather than just holding a longer inventory of it. A list is where most gratitude stops. It is where this starts. Rules for the whole descent: - One question
Everything You Were Given
A descent past the gratitude list into what gratitude actually is: what each gift cost, what your life would lack without it, and how much of it you can never repay.
Rabbit Holebeginner
Help me find what I've disowned in myself by examining what I can't stand in other people. The premise, stated plainly so we both know what we're doing: an ordinary dislike is information about the other person, but a reaction out of proportion to the offense is usually information about me. Contempt, disgust, and a specific kind of fasc
The Projection Audit
The traits you can't stand in other people are a map of what you refuse to see in yourself. This walks the map, using your own irritations as data.
Rabbit Holeintermediate
Audit my hidden motives using signaling theory: the argument that much human behavior is about advertising qualities to other people, and that we hide this from ourselves precisely so we can advertise more convincingly. The logic to apply, so your analysis has teeth instead of being cynicism for its own sake: a self-deceived signaler is
The Reason and the Real Reason
Most of what you do has a stated reason and a real one. Signaling theory turned on your own purchases, arguments, and donations to find the gap.
Rabbit Holeadvanced