TL;DR: LLMs can help make reasoning structure visible. This paper asks whether, when, and how to deploy that power—safely and usefully.

🧪 Try the Demo: FallacyTag Live Demo

How to use this paper

  • Follow your interests using the tag legend below.
  • Skim the table; each section title is a link.
  • Tags are cues, not verdicts; share visibility only with consent.

Interest tags

  • 🧠 Framing — Problem, context, and aims
  • ⚙️ Design — What the system is and how it works
  • 🔍 Feasibility — Evidence, limits, evaluation
  • ⚖️ Constraints — Risks, ethics, guardrails
  • 🚀 Next Steps — What to do with it

Quick Navigation (by interest)

Section Summary Tags
0. Abstract Thesis, scope, and posture: surface structure, not fact-checking. 🧠
1. What You Are Reading What this is (a civic design essay) and how to approach it. 🧠
2. The Societal Blind Spot — We See the Arguments, Not the Reasoning Why reasoning is often invisible online; the feedback loop it creates. 🧠
3. How LLMs Can Support Better Reasoning What works now: a narrow but useful path; nudges as pedagogy. 🧠🔍
4. The Proposal — What FallacyTag Might Be Concept and interaction model; a gentle, optional tagging loop. ⚙️🧠
5. Mediums, Modalities and Fit How design shifts across text, audio, and video; flow–friction tradeoffs. ⚙️
6. How It Works Core pipeline, key components, variation points, and a reference config. ⚙️
7. Is It Feasible? Technical, conceptual, and social feasibility; what’s in scope now. 🔍
8. Design Constraints and Ethical Edges Ambiguity, perception, privacy, and weaponization—plus design implications. ⚖️
9. Conditional Case — When This Is Worth Building Fit criteria via a scorecard; concrete use cases and how to read them. 🔍⚖️🚀
10. Call to Explore Invitations (builders, educators, designers, critics) and research questions. 🚀
Appendices Experiments, model notes, PLA, and weighting rationale (A–E). ⚙️🔍
📘 Briefing Document High-level summary for new readers, builders, and critics 🧠⚙️🔍⚖️🚀