Life Application of Armando

I had a realization a few weeks ago, but I'm not entirely sure if it's a sound conclusion. So I decided to blog about it, figuring that two Philosophy majors, a Children's Ministry major, and an English Composition major should be able to [lovingly] tell me whether or not I'm logically irrational, theologically heretical, or grammatically incapable.

Armando Diaz. An improvisational long form in which monologues followed by scenic exploration of the world described in the monologues. The main question that is asked in an Armando is "if that is true in this world, what else follows?" or something to that end.

The realization that I came to is that this is the question that is asked to critically analyze arguments. There is an analysis of a claim that is made, and then the logical effects of the argument are followed back. When a claim is made (philosophically or theologically) it is not immediately accepted as truth, but it is compared back with things that are held to be true to assess whether or not it holds true. In reasoning, it is better to be able to defend your argument or assumptions across a wide range or situations ('what else follows?') rather than having one specific example.

I don't know, maybe none of this makes sense, but I found it an interesting intersection of improv and academia. Plus, it makes me feel cool to have a real-life application for the world of critical thinking.