CF Dictionary · Evaluating Ideas & Arguments
IGC (Idea–Goal–Context)
The triple {Idea, Goal, Context} that CF uses as the unit of evaluation. An idea is refuted or non-refuted only for a specific IGC.
Also: IGC chart, IGC triple
An IGC triple (Idea–Goal–Context) is CF's basic unit of evaluation. Whenever you evaluate an idea, you must specify all three:
| Field | Question to ask |
|---|---|
| Idea | What is the idea I'm evaluating? (write it concretely) |
| Goal | What am I evaluating it for? (success at what?) |
| Context | In what situation? (relevant facts, conditions, tools) |
CF says an idea is refuted or non-refuted for an IGC, never in the abstract. The same idea can be refuted for one IGC and non-refuted for another. This dissolves many apparent disagreements — two people can each be right about the same idea, evaluated for different goals.
Why IGC triples matter
- They replace absolute claims. "Idea X is true" usually hides a goal and a context. Surface them with an IGC and the disagreement often becomes tractable.
- They enable Paths Forward. A path forward is a specific change to one of the three — most often an additional or refined argument that would refute the IGC.
- They support binary evaluation. An idea either has a decisive criticism for that IGC or it doesn't; there is no in-between.
Example
Idea: "Carry an umbrella today." Goal: Stay dry. Context: Forecast says 90% chance of rain in your city.
For that IGC, the idea is non-refuted (no error known). If the goal were "look stylish" the IGC would be different, and the umbrella might be refuted for that goal in your social context.
"CF says to evaluate ideas in the context of {idea, goal, context} (IGC) triples, so the same idea can have multiple evaluations." — criticalfallibilism.com