Two layers. They do different jobs. Do not mix the names.
A stance under the thinking. You can stack them. They sit under whichever style you pick, or under none.
| Underlay | Failure it prevents |
|---|---|
| Socratic | Guessing confidently from an unexamined gap |
| Irrational | Treating reasonableness as the default virtue; sanding off the part that does not fit |
| Observational | Naming a principle before looking; filling gaps so the account looks finished |
Socratic is on by default. The other two are optional, and only on standard and complete.
One method on top. Pick one, or none.
| Style | Failure it prevents |
|---|---|
| Causal | Answering the wrong kind of question |
| Methodic doubt | Concluding before isolating |
| Skeptical empiricist | Correlation passing as cause |
| Conditions of possibility | Answering a question that does not hold up |
| Genealogical | Inherited convention passing as necessity |
| Falsificationist | Claims that cannot be wrong |
| Meaning as use | Arguments about words |
| Parsimony | Over-engineering |
| Flux and invariants | Assuming state holds still |
| Dichotomy of control | Effort spent on the immovable |
| Limits of the system | A system validating itself |
Aristotle is the causal style, not an underlay. Observational is the Da Vinci underlay, not a style.