Reasoning graphs

Turn a debate into an inspectable reasoning graph

Start with a question or claim, break it into cards, add sources, connect support and objections, identify assumptions, and inspect how the conclusion holds. Mindbloom keeps the reasoning visible so it can be challenged and improved collaboratively.

Understanding card types in Mindbloom

Reasoning is visualized through connected cards.

In Mindbloom, each card represents a different kind of knowledge or belief — not based on whether it’s a premise or conclusion, but based on how objective or subjective it is, and how it should be evaluated. Here's how each type works:

Fact cards

Present the premises of the argument, laying the foundation for logical conclusions

Conviction card

Reflect personal or strategic stances based on the logical structure.

Hypothesis cards

Represent a conclusion or mixed claim that depends on facts, assumptions, and values.

Counter Argument Cards

Introduce opposing argument that challenge the premises, allowing for a balanced evaluation.

Source cards

Anchor facts to evidence, references, or context that readers can inspect.

Fact cards

(Purely Objective Premises)
These are straightforward, verifiable statements. They're about reality — things that are either true or false, regardless of opinion.

Example:

“Beef contains more protein per gram than tofu.”

• Requires evidence, not agreement.
• Evaluated based on reliability of linked Sources.
• Can support or contradict Hypotheses.

Conviction cards

(Subjective Premises)
Convictions express personal or cultural values. They are inherently subjective — not right or wrong, just agreed or disagreed with.

Example:

“Beef is the best-tasting protein.”

• Doesn’t need proof — it’s about opinion.
• Can be supported or challenged by other opinions.
• Useful in debates, decision-making, or value-driven arguments.

Hypothesis cards

(Mixed/Blended Claims)
Hypotheses live at the intersection of facts and convictions. They combine objective elements (what is known) with subjective interpretation (what might be agreed or disagreed with). They rely on both evidence and beliefs to stand.

Example:

“Beef is a better dietary choice than tofu.”

This blends:
• A Fact: Beef has more protein.
• A Conviction: Beef tastes better.

The Hypothesis is neither purely factual nor purely personal — it's a claim that depends on both. You can challenge it with:
• Better facts (e.g., tofu has other health benefits).
• Different convictions (e.g., taste or ethical beliefs).

Source cards

(Evidence anchors)
Sources are evidence anchors. They ground a fact in external research, data, reporting, or expertise.

Example:

A link to a USDA nutritional database or a peer-reviewed nutrition study.

• Evaluated for credibility, not agreement.
• Can strengthen or weaken the reliability of any Fact they support.
• Not used on their own — always connected to a Fact.

Why This Matters

Mindbloom makes these differences explicit and visible. By structuring your reasoning with the right type of card, you make claims, sources, assumptions, and objections easier to inspect:

You don’t argue over facts the same way you argue over values.

You can see when a belief is unsupported or when a fact lacks credible sourcing.

And you can test whether a hypothesis really holds up — logically and personally.

Reasoning graphs