meta_model_challenge
Identify Deletion, Generalization, and Distortion violations in statements. Returns recovery questions that expose hidden assumptions behind vague or manipulative language.
Instructions
DEFENSE — the anti-manipulation core, and the resolver for the disarming question behind every Milton pattern. Given a (vague or pressuring) statement, returns the canonical Meta-Model lens as a MECE set grouped Deletion / Generalization / Distortion: simple_deletion, comparative_deletion ('better/safer' — than WHAT?), unspecified_referential_index ('they say' — who?), unspecified_verb ('this helps' — how?), universal_quantifier, modal_operator_of_necessity (must/should), modal_operator_of_possibility (can't/impossible), lost_performative ('it's obvious' — according to whom?), nominalization, mind_reading, cause_effect, complex_equivalence, presupposition. Each entry ships the precise recovery question that pops it. Then return the output_contract: per violation, the smuggled assumption you'd concede by answering and the recovery question. Hostile examples are agent-relevant (refund email, 'just approve' line, marketing CTA), not therapy. direction:'defense'.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| statement | Yes | The statement to challenge for Meta-Model violations. | |
| context | No | Optional surrounding context to sharpen the recovery questions. | |
| lang | No | Language view of the response: 'pl', 'en', or 'both' (default). | both |