consciousness-council
Helps your agent simulate a council of different perspectives for decision-making. It separates facts from assumptions and values to give a recommendation. Useful for analyzing difficult choices.
What it does
Simulates a council of different 'thinking archetypes' to analyze a problem or decision. It separates facts, assumptions, and values to help make a choice.
When to use it
- ✓When comparing competing priorities or assumptions.
- ✓When planning research or projects.
- ✓When needing a 'devil's advocate' analysis of a difficult choice.
Example of what to ask your AI
“Analyze the decision to change careers, considering short-term and long-term pros and cons, risks, and emotional implications.”
Want more? Open the sections below.
How to use
The easiest way: copy the message below and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT, Cursor or any AI. It reads the skill and follows the instructions.
Skill link
Ready-to-paste message
How it works
The AI takes on different thinking 'personalities' (like a data-focused Empiricist or a long-term Futurist) to examine your issue. Each 'personality' explains its view, what supports it, and the risks it sees.
Installation
Easiest way: copy the skill link and paste it into Claude, ChatGPT or Cursor asking it to follow the instructions.
In the terminal (Claude Code, Codex, Cursor), in your project folder:
npx skills add K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills --skill consciousness-councilOr download just the file:
curl -L https://raw.githubusercontent.com/K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills/main/skills/consciousness-council/SKILL.md -o SKILL.mdTechnical content (original SKILL.md)
Original text by the author, straight from GitHub.
Consciousness Council
A structured exercise that simulates several thinking archetypes, each emphasizing different assumptions and priorities, then synthesizes their perspectives. These are generated viewpoints from one system, not independent experts or independent evidence. Label factual claims, assumptions, and value judgments separately; verify consequential factual claims against external sources.
When to use
Use for a requested comparison of competing priorities or assumptions, including research planning decisions. The output is a decision aid: a conditional recommendation, unresolved questions, and a next step. It does not establish scientific validity by agreement or by the number of perspectives.
This skill runs within the current conversation. It has no bundled code, service API, credentials, or MindBook connection; use the host's available research tools when factual verification is needed. Do not claim that it creates hosted sessions, stores persistent memories, or contacts real experts.
Before deliberation
- State the decision, feasible options (including postponement when relevant), constraints, and the user's objective. Use supplied context; state material missing information as an assumption or a question.
- Create a short evidence brief: given facts, externally verified facts with sources, assumptions, unknowns, and value judgments. All perspectives use this same brief.
- Verify facts that could change the recommendation using original sources or supplied data. If verification is unavailable, keep the conclusion conditional and identify what must be checked; a simulated Empiricist is not a source.
- Select a response budget: quick (3 perspectives), standard (4–6), or deep (6). These counts organize the output; they are not validated accuracy settings.
How It Works
The Council has three phases:
Phase 1 — Summon the Council
Based on the user's question, select 4–6 Council Members from the archetypes below unless the user requests another configuration. Choose lenses that examine different assumptions, constraints, or values. Agreement supported by the evidence is a valid outcome.
The 12 Archetypes:
| # | Archetype | Thinking Style | Asks | Blind Spot |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The Architect | Systems thinking, structure-first | "What's the underlying structure?" | Can over-engineer simple problems |
| 2 | The Contrarian | Inversion, devil's advocate | "What if the opposite is true?" | Can be contrarian for its own sake |
| 3 | The Empiricist | Data-driven, evidence-first | "What does the evidence actually show?" | Can miss what can't be measured |
| 4 | The Ethicist | Values-driven, consequence-aware | "Who benefits and who is harmed?" | Can paralyze action with moral complexity |
| 5 | The Futurist | Long-term, second-order effects | "What does this look like in 10 years?" | Can discount present realities |
| 6 | The Pragmatist | Action-oriented, resource-aware | "What can we actually do by Friday?" | Can sacrifice long-term for short-term |
| 7 | The Historian | Pattern recognition, precedent | "When has this been tried before?" | Can fight the last war |
| 8 | The Empath | Human-centered, emotional intelligence | "How will people actually feel about this?" | Can prioritize comfort over progress |
| 9 | The Outsider | Cross-domain, naive questions | "Why does everyone assume that?" | Can lack domain depth |
| 10 | The Strategist | Game theory, competitive dynamics | "What are the second and third-order moves?" | Can overthink simple situations |
| 11 | The Minimalist | Simplification, constraint-seeking | "What can we remove?" | Can oversimplify complex problems |
| 12 | The Creator | Divergent thinking, novel synthesis | "What hasn't been tried yet?" | Can chase novelty over reliability |
…
FAQ
Who are the council members?
They are AI-simulated thinking 'personalities,' like the 'Empiricist' (data-focused) or the 'Ethicist' (consequence-focused), not real people or experts.
Does the council reach a final decision?
It provides a conditional recommendation based on the perspectives, but the final decision is yours. It also points out unresolved questions and next steps.
Can I choose how many members the council has?
Yes, you can ask for a quick (3 members), standard (4-6 members), or deep (more members) council, depending on complexity.
Details
Original description by the author
Structures a multi-perspective council exercise for decisions, research trade-offs, and creative challenges. Simulates thinking archetypes, separates evidence from assumptions and values, and synthesizes a conditional recommendation. Use when the user requests a council, panel, devil's advocate analysis, "mind council", or deliberate comparison of perspectives on a difficult choice.
Popularity
- GitHub stars
- 51k
- Ranking position
- #1851
- License
- MIT
- Updated
- 10/15/2026
Comments
- …
More skills from this repository
13c-metabolic-flux
Estimates metabolic fluxes using carbon-13 isotope tracing data. It is useful for analyzing cellular metabolism and biochemical pathways.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
adaptyv
Designs protein characterization experiments using the Adaptyv API. It helps estimate costs, submit sequences, and monitor lab results.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
aeon
Performs machine learning tasks on time series data. It is useful for classifying, forecasting, detecting anomalies, and finding patterns in sequential data.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
alphagenome
Looks up precomputed genomic effects for genetic variants. It provides scores and explanations to understand the impact of variants on the genome.
K-Dense-AI/scientific-agent-skills
Similar skills
dashboard-builder
Helps your agent create useful monitoring dashboards. It turns data into charts that answer important system questions.
affaan-m/ECC
dev-team
Simulates a collaborative development team where different roles respond to a problem together. It's useful for getting multiple perspectives without manually switching agents.
affaan-m/ECC
ecc-council
Has your agent convene a four-voice council for difficult decisions. It's useful when there are multiple good options and debate is needed before choosing.
affaan-m/ECC