Answer a question five completely different ways — as five independent minds with clashing worldviews — then converge on what survives. Use when asked for multiple perspectives, look at this from every angle, what would different people think, or give me a range of views not one answer. Produces five genuinely distinct takes (each committed to one worldview, not hedged), the tensions between them made explicit, and a final synthesis that keeps what's strongest — deliberately widening the range …
Answer a question five completely different ways — as five independent minds with clashing worldviews — then converge on what survives.
Use when asked for multiple perspectives, look at this from every angle, what would different people think, or give me a range of views not one answer.
Produces five genuinely distinct takes (each committed to one worldview, not hedged), the tensions between them made explicit, and a final synthesis that keeps what's strongest — deliberately widening the range before narrowing it.
Similar popular skills
Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.
Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.
Claude CodeNot declared
CursorNot declared
CodexNot declared
GitHub CopilotNot declared
WindsurfNot declared
Gemini CLINot declared
ClineNot declared
OpenCodeNot declared
Repository health
Stars1.3K
LicenseLICENSE
Default branchmain
Open issues7
Status
Active
Package contents
Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.
skill mdSKILL.md3,759 B
docsSUMMARY.md543 B
History
First seen on skills.sh
First recorded snapshot · 2 installs
SKILL.md
Five Minds
A single answer is a single angle. This runs the question through five deliberately different minds — each fully committed to its own worldview, none aware of the others — so you get a real spread instead of one blended, cautious view. Then a sixth pass reads them against each other and keeps what holds. It's structured disagreement, on purpose.
What This Skill Produces
Five distinct takes — each from a different frame (e.g. the optimist, the skeptic, the pragmatist, the outsider, the long-term thinker), each committed rather than hedged
The clashes — where the minds directly contradict each other, made explicit (that's the signal)
What each sees that the others miss — the unique contribution of each angle
A synthesis — the final view that keeps the strongest points and resolves (or holds) the tensions
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
The question — the decision, problem, or topic
Any angles you want included — specific perspectives that matter here
Your context — enough to make the takes concrete
What you'll do with it — a decision, understanding, or ideas
Framework: Diverge Hard, Then Converge
Pick five genuinely different frames. Choose lenses that will actually disagree — not five shades of the same view. Match some to the specific question.
Commit each fully. Each mind argues its worldview without hedging or nodding to the others — a committed take reveals more than a balanced mush.
Keep them independent. Don't let one take soften the next; the value is in the unblended range.
Surface the tensions. Where the minds clash is exactly where the real decision lives — name those points.
Then synthesize. A final pass weighs them and keeps what's strongest, saying plainly where genuine tension remains rather than papering over it.
