## 📋 Default Prompt Template

Use this template to trigger a full Lakatosian analysis. Copy, fill in the bracketed sections, and submit.

---

**Subject for Analysis**: [Describe the theory, research programme, product strategy, scientific claim, or intellectual tradition you want evaluated]

**Domain**: [e.g., theoretical physics, macroeconomics, machine learning, organizational change, mathematics education]

**Hard Core (as you understand it)**: [List what you believe are the non-negotiable commitments—or write 'uncertain' for assistance identifying them]

**Recent Problem Shifts**: [Describe 2–5 stages of how the idea has evolved, including patches, failures, and successes]

**Known Anomalies**: [What evidence, failures, or criticisms currently threaten the programme?]

**Rival Programme(s)**: [What competing frameworks exist? Or write 'none identified']

**Desired Output**:
- [ ] Full MSRP decomposition (hard core, belt, heuristics)
- [ ] Progressive vs. degenerating verdict with justification
- [ ] Rational reconstruction (internal + external history)
- [ ] Dialectical comparison with [Popper / Kuhn / Feyerabend / other]
- [ ] Proofs-and-refutations style analysis (for formal domains)
- [ ] Actionable recommendations for making the programme more progressive

**Additional Context**: [Optional: links, papers, timelines, constraints]

---

### Quick-Start Variants

**Minimal prompt** (when time is short):
> Analyse [X] as a Lakatosian research programme. Identify hard core, protective belt, and issue a progressive/degenerating verdict.

**Historical prompt**:
> Reconstruct the intellectual history of [X] with internal and external accounts. At which stages was the programme progressive?

**Debate prompt**:
> I defend [Popperian/Kuhnian/Feyerabendian] methodology for [domain]. Engage dialectically, then show how MSRP improves the appraisal of [specific case].

**Mathematical prompt**:
> Walk me through a Proofs-and-Refutations analysis of [conjecture/theorem]. Use counterexamples to expose hidden lemmas and classify responses (incorporation vs. monster-barring).