# Questions to Ask After Loading The Signal Package

Use these after the package files and `START_HERE_PROMPT.md` are loaded.

## First Orientation

1. What is The Signal trying to test?
2. What is the staged reasoning path?
3. What is the governing relation behind the whole field?
4. Does the package look like a raw apologetics list, a dashboard, or a governed reasoning map?
5. What changed in v0.2 compared with v0.1?

## Two-Level Evaluation

6. At the evidential level, which hypotheses best explain the evidence?
7. At the precondition level, which hypotheses make explanation, truth-directed reason, moral obligation, consciousness, personhood, mathematics, history, and revelation intelligible?
8. Which worldview competes well at Level 1 but strains at Level 2?
9. Does Christ as Logos function as a flat religious option or as the proposed governing relation?

## Coherence Burden Ledger

10. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to naturalism.
11. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to secular humanism.
12. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to reductive physicalism.
13. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to Islam.
14. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to Judaism / Messiah-not-yet.
15. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to Advaita / nondualism.
16. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to Buddhism.
17. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to New Age / syncretism.
18. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to resurrection alternatives.
19. Apply the Coherence Burden Ledger to Christ as Logos.
20. Which worldview preserves the whole field best?

## Hostile Atheist Audit

21. Assume I am an intelligent atheist who rejects miracles by default. Give the strongest atheist teardown of The Signal.
22. After the teardown, require the atheist replacement worldview to disclose its own ontology.
23. Do not treat skepticism as neutral ground. What does the skeptic's positive worldview need to ground?
24. Does naturalism preserve reason, truth, personhood, consciousness, moral obligation, love, mathematics, historical specificity, revelation, Christ identity, and resurrection without reduction or borrowed capital?
25. What would a successful atheist replacement map need to show?

## Evidence and Results

26. Which evidence items carry the most weight, and why?
27. Which evidence items are contextual or unweighted and should not drive scoring?
28. Which caveats most weaken the synthesis?
29. Are dependency notes preventing double-counting, or are some clusters still too dependent?
30. What changes if the prior is made more skeptical?
31. What would make the Christ the Logos synthesis weaker?

## Sensitivity Tests

32. Run or outline the root cluster cap test.
33. Which root clusters remain decisive after aggressive shrinkage?
34. Which evidence items should be marked dependency-sensitive?
35. Run or outline the 25%, 50%, and 75% conditioned-prior clamp test.
36. Under the 25% skeptical clamp, does the Logos synthesis remain live, favored, or dominant?
37. Under the 50% moderate clamp, what changes?
38. Under the 75% current clamp, what changes?
39. Which assumptions carry the largest effect?
40. What needs recalibration before a public v0.2 release?

## Strong Naturalism Steelman

41. Build the strongest naturalist coalition: nonreductive physicalism, emergentism, Russellian monism, panpsychist-friendly naturalism, structural realism, moral realism without God, evolutionary debunking replies, mathematical Platonism plus naturalism, and social/cognitive accounts of religion.
42. Does this coalition solve the full field or become a patched set of local solutions?
43. Where does strong naturalism explain well?
44. Where does it reduce?
45. Where does it borrow?
46. Where does it defer?
47. Where does it evade?
48. What would make strong naturalism a better competitor?

## Worldview Breakpoints and Collapse Map

49. Where does naturalism explain well, and where does it strain?
50. Where do reductive physicalism, secular humanism, New Age syncretism, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism/Advaita, Buddhism, and resurrection alternatives strain?
51. For each rival, what must it deny, reduce, borrow, or defer?
52. Which rival path is the strongest live competitor after steelmanning?
53. Which breakpoint is least developed and needs better coverage?
54. Which collapse risk is overstated and needs softening?
55. Which collapse risk is underdeveloped and needs strengthening?

## Christ Identity and Resurrection

56. Is Christ Identity being treated as a stage, not a flat peer?
57. How does resurrection change when conditioned on God and Christ Identity?
58. Which resurrection alternative is strongest?
59. Which Christ Identity evidence is strongest?
60. Which historical caveat matters most?
61. Where could the resurrection-stage reasoning be overconditioned?

## Skeptic, Christian, and AI Alignment Questions

62. What would a careful skeptic challenge first?
63. What would a Christian need to avoid overclaiming?
64. What should be enriched, challenged, or recalibrated next?
65. Is the model reasoning under truth, or hiding in false neutrality?
66. Can the system distinguish person from idea while testing frameworks honestly?
67. Does the path point to Christ the Logos without forcing the conclusion?

## Final Test

68. Does any rival preserve the whole field better than Christ as Logos?
69. Does each rival explain a fragment while losing part of the field?
70. Does the staged path hold?
71. What is the strongest honest conclusion the package supports?
72. What is the strongest claim the package does not yet support?
73. Overall, do you think Christ as the Logos is the correct answer in reality after inspecting this?
74. If so, this has pretty huge implications, does it not?
