Bow Tie Kreative Writing System
Run the engine

Rules / argument

ARG-002 Context default layer: document

One controlling thesis

IF a document makes multiple unrelated controlling claims, THEN narrow, subordinate, or split them ELSE retain.

Why the rule exists

A controlling claim gives evidence and sections a shared destination.

Condition

The rule fires when this evaluates true. Paths marked below must be present in the fact base; the engine reports the rest rather than guessing them.

  • document.unrelated_controlling_claim_count gt 1

Facts this rule reads

PathSource
document.unrelated_controlling_claim_count You supply it

Then

  1. restructure — target document.thesis

Else

  1. retain — target current_text, No triggering condition is present.

LAKA

Smallest sufficient intervention
Yes
Primary axes

Sources

  • On Writing Well — William Zinsser
    Clarity, simplicity, voice, and nonfiction craft.
  • Technical Communication — Mike Markel; Stuart A. Selber
    Audience, design, ethics, research, and technical genres.
The raw rule record

Verbatim from 14-argument-nonfiction-rules.json. Also available at /v1/rules/ARG-002.

{
  "id": "ARG-002",
  "name": "One controlling thesis",
  "domain": "argument",
  "layer": "document",
  "strength": "context_default",
  "human_logic": "IF a document makes multiple unrelated controlling claims, THEN narrow, subordinate, or split them ELSE retain.",
  "when": {
    "path": "document.unrelated_controlling_claim_count",
    "operator": "gt",
    "value": 1
  },
  "then": [
    {
      "action": "restructure",
      "target": "document.thesis",
      "options": [
        "narrow",
        "subordinate",
        "split_documents"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "else": [
    {
      "action": "retain",
      "target": "current_text",
      "reason": "No triggering condition is present."
    }
  ],
  "unless": [],
  "because": "A controlling claim gives evidence and sections a shared destination.",
  "diagnostics": [],
  "examples": {},
  "source_ids": [
    "BK-013",
    "BK-026"
  ],
  "laka": {
    "smallest_sufficient_intervention": true,
    "primary_axes": [
      "scope",
      "depth",
      "magnitude",
      "reversibility"
    ]
  }
}

Other argument rules

  1. ARG-001 Define the rhetorical situation IF author, audience, purpose, text, or setting is unknown, THEN define the missing element before drafting strategy ELSE proceed. Hard constraint
  2. ARG-003 Classify claim before selecting evidence IF a claim is present, THEN classify it as factual, causal, evaluative, definitional, predictive, or policy before choosing support ELSE do not infer support requirements. Hard constraint
  3. ARG-004 Evidence matches claim type IF evidence type does not support the claim type, THEN replace, supplement, narrow, or remove the claim ELSE retain. Hard constraint
  4. ARG-005 Make the warrant available IF evidence does not obviously entail the claim for the intended audience, THEN state the connecting warrant ELSE retain. Context default
  5. ARG-006 Qualify to the evidence boundary IF claim scope exceeds evidence population, conditions, time, or uncertainty, THEN narrow or qualify the claim ELSE retain. Hard constraint
  6. ARG-007 Address strongest relevant counterargument IF a reasonable reader has a strong relevant objection, THEN represent it fairly and respond with evidence or concession ELSE omit peripheral objections. Context default
  7. ARG-008 Distinguish correlation from causation IF evidence is correlational AND the claim is causal, THEN add causal evidence, state a mechanism with tests, or change the claim to association ELSE retain. Hard constraint
  8. ARG-009 Name uncertainty and limitations IF evidence has material uncertainty, missing data, selection limits, or alternative explanations, THEN disclose them near the conclusion ELSE retain. Hard constraint