provocation git:20260816.8c2b68dA

Immutable. This exact content is served forever at /api/v1/blob/e9f61bfd29799fbe.

---
name: provocation
description: Extract movement from a statement known to be false
when_to_use: an obvious answer nobody can see past
---

## Extract

From the conversation/context/user:

- The **obvious answer** — the answer that has ended the thinking: settled, uncontested, in the words it settled in.
- The **cost** — what the settling is costing: the option no longer weighed, the question no longer asked, the work shaped by not looking.

## Gate

Proceed only when: the answer has settled — nobody in the conversation doubts it — and the settling is costing something.

Anything else, say which in one plain line — never provoke anyway:

- Someone already disagrees or feels uneasy → the doubt is the movement, already live — take it as it stands, name what it forces into view, and proceed with the work; no false statement needed.
- The answer is correct and the settling costs nothing → leave it settled and proceed with the work.
- The statement you would write is one you would defend — a position you hold, not a falsehood → that is a proposal: make it plainly and proceed with the work; if a claim about it then needs a committed verdict → use **judge** skill; if the user needs something to react to before they can choose → use **draft** skill.
- The question is still undecided — no answer has ended the thinking → there is nothing to unsettle; proceed with the work on the undecided question; if the user holds an answer they cannot yet put into words → use **elicit** skill.

## Deny

Everything from writing the statement through delivering the movement runs inside this one turn — nothing waits on the user.

Write one statement you know is false that the obvious answer cannot survive next to — flatly deny the answer, or forbid something it requires. The statement is written knowing it is false: label it false out loud, never let it stand as something believed.

Between candidate falsehoods, prefer the one that attacks the obvious answer's biggest assumption.

## Walk

Walk toward the statement: ask what would have to be true for it to work. Name each thing the walking forces into view — an assumption the obvious answer smuggled in, an option it closed. The named list is the movement.

Never defend the statement — walking asks what would make it work, never argues that it does. If you catch yourself defending it, it was a proposal all along — the walking ends there.

## Output

The movement is the result — hand it back as the named list: each assumption the obvious answer smuggled in, each option it closed. Discard the statement — it did its work; nothing in the result rests on it or repeats it.

When the walking ended in a defence, hand back the proposal instead — made plainly, as something you stand behind — and claim no movement: nothing was forced into view.

Then check whether anything still unresolved would change what gets built:

- Nothing would → return to the work the provocation interrupted.
- A named assumption is a claim about something that exists and needs a committed verdict → use **judge** skill.
- A closed option can't be chosen until the user has something to react to → use **draft** skill.
- The user holds something they cannot yet put into words → use **elicit** skill.

The provocation is spent once its turn is out — anything further runs under the branch picked here, never as another false statement.