[pknopf]

I've always wanted a better way to document and structure arguments/debates.

Assertions can have supporting statements (as children), that can be further expanded and evaluated.

This way, I can evaluate and discard branches, distilling an argument to what matters.

Would a tool like this help me?

[fastball]

I'm the cofounder of a startup[1] working on an app that might scratch your itch.

We built a note-taking system around digital notecards instead of documents, and those cards can be both linked hierarchally with parent/child relationships (and unlike most other platforms a card can have multiple parents) as well as with inline markdown link-style linking that you'll find in many other apps / wikis / tools for thought.

I definitely think the notecard format could be very useful for this use-case, as one card = one argument makes a lot of sense.

[1] https://supernotes.app

[XFrequentist]

Like this? https://www.rationaleonline.com/

[robluxus]

There's also https://argdown.org/ -- A simple syntax for complex argumentation

[pknopf]

Oh! That looks awesome! Thanks!

[ibn_khaldun]

You may be interested in Hypernomicon

http://hypernomicon.org/

[modeless]

Another one https://www.kialo.com/tour

[joshspankit]

I really find Kialo to be awesome for focusing the random arguments that see:to happen so much online. There are basically zero duplications in arguments since there’s a spot specifically for each one.

There are some things I would change, but I’m happy about the time and effort I’ve put in to the discussions there.