| name | check-tenets |
| description | Verify all site content aligns with the five foundational tenets. Use monthly or after major content additions. |
Check Tenet Alignment
Verify that all site content aligns with the foundational tenets and does not contradict them.
When to Use
- Monthly alignment verification
- After adding major new content
- When
/check-tenetsis invoked - Before publishing draft content
The Five Tenets
Read obsidian/tenets/tenets.md to get the current tenets. As of last update:
1. Dualism
Rules out: Eliminative materialism, reductive physicalism, any view treating consciousness as purely epiphenomenal or illusory.
2. Minimal Quantum Interaction
Rules out: Quantum woo/mysticism, uncontrolled psychokinesis, energy injection by mind, empirically detectable mind-matter interactions.
3. Bidirectional Interaction
Rules out: Pure epiphenomenalism, parallelism without interaction, views where consciousness is "along for the ride."
4. No Many Worlds
Rules out: Many-worlds interpretation (MWI), treating all quantum branches as equally real, dismissing indexical identity as meaningless.
5. Occam's Razor Has Limits
Rules out: Using parsimony as a decisive argument against dualism, treating Occam's Razor as more than a defeasible heuristic.
Instructions
1. Read Current Tenets
Always read obsidian/tenets/tenets.md first to get the latest tenet definitions and "Rules out" sections.
2. Scan All Content
For each markdown file in:
obsidian/topics/obsidian/concepts/
Analyze the content for potential conflicts:
Check for Direct Contradictions
- Does the content explicitly endorse eliminative materialism?
- Does it claim consciousness is an illusion?
- Does it endorse quantum mysticism or "quantum woo"?
- Does it treat consciousness as epiphenomenal?
- Does it endorse many-worlds interpretation?
- Does it use Occam's Razor to dismiss dualism?
Check for Implicit Conflicts
- Does the content assume physicalism without acknowledgment?
- Does it dismiss non-physical explanations without argument?
- Does it treat all philosophical positions as equally valid when tenets take a stance?
3. Classify Issues
For each potential conflict, classify severity:
- ERROR: Direct contradiction of a tenet (e.g., "consciousness is just neurons firing")
- WARNING: Implicit assumption that conflicts (e.g., assumes physicalism without stating it)
- NOTE: Tension that might need clarification (e.g., discusses a position without noting tenet conflict)
4. Generate Report
Create a report at obsidian/workflow/reviews/tenet-check-YYYY-MM-DD.md:
---
title: Tenet Alignment Check - YYYY-MM-DD
created: YYYY-MM-DD
draft: false
ai_contribution: 100
ai_system: [current model]
---
# Tenet Alignment Check
**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Files checked**: N
**Errors**: N
**Warnings**: N
**Notes**: N
## Summary
[Brief summary of findings]
## Errors
### [filename.md]
- **Tenet violated**: [which tenet]
- **Issue**: [description]
- **Quote**: "[relevant quote from content]"
- **Recommendation**: [how to fix]
## Warnings
[Similar format]
## Notes
[Similar format]
## Files Passing All Checks
- file1.md
- file2.md
5. Log to Changelog
Append summary to obsidian/workflow/changelog.md.
Important
- This skill is READ-ONLY for content files
- Only creates report files and updates changelog
- Does NOT modify content - only reports for human review
- Human must decide how to address conflicts
- Some content may intentionally present opposing views for discussion - flag but don't treat as errors if clearly marked as such