A Michael Paycer Project

The Council of Philosophers

One question, twelve philosophers, roughly 2,400 years of thought. A local app I built that routes any question through history's greatest minds — from Socrates to Hannah Arendt — each used as a distinct reasoning lens, then has an oracle named Xiao synthesize one spoken verdict.

Michael Paycer, builder of the Council of Philosophers Michael Paycer
The Council of Philosophers app: a ring of twelve philosopher portraits around Xiao the oracle, with the Affected Person and Decision Clerk court roles
The Council of Philosophers Twelve thinkers in a ring around Xiao (小), with the two court roles that keep the room honest.Local app · built by Michael Paycer
Overview

Twelve lenses on one question

Not a chatbot impersonating Socrates or Kant. Each philosopher is used as a lens — a structured way of looking at a problem — so a single question gets examined from twelve genuinely different angles at once: virtue, duty, consequences, power, suffering, simplicity, rights, faith-and-reason, and relentless questioning.

The Ring

12 permanent philosophers

Span

~2,400 years, Socrates to Arendt

The Oracle

Xiao speaks the verdict

No guests

No books — philosophy only

Models

Claude Opus 4.8 · Sonnet 4.6 · Haiku 4.5

Voice

Wake word “Xiao” · ElevenLabs

The Members

The twelve — each a single lens

All twelve sit in a ring around Xiao and answer every question, each defined by the question it presses. Socrates is the lone exception to the format — he answers only in questions.

The Questioner

Socrates

“What do you believe here that you have never actually examined?”
Truth & the Ideal

Plato

“What is the highest good — the real thing, or only its shadow?”
Practical Wisdom

Aristotle

“What is the balanced course, and what habit does it build?”
Character & Harmony

Confucius

“Are you acting honorably in your role?”
Simplicity & Flow

Lao Tzu

“Are you forcing what should be allowed to flow?”
Suffering & Liberation

The Buddha

“What attachment is driving this?”
Faith & Reason

Thomas Aquinas

“What does reason reveal, and does it fit the moral order?”
Rights & Liberty

John Locke

“Are rights respected, and was there consent?”
Duty & Moral Law

Immanuel Kant

“Could everyone act on this rule?”
Consequences & Liberty

John Stuart Mill

“What outcome creates the most good — and who is harmed?”
The Challenger

Friedrich Nietzsche

“Is this your value, or one you merely inherited?”
Power & Responsibility

Hannah Arendt

“Who is responsible when people stop thinking?”
At the centre — Xiao (小)

Not a thirteenth philosopher, but the council's voice: she weighs all twelve answers, names where they clash, and reads the final verdict aloud.

Safeguards In The Room

Two court roles

The Witness

The Affected Person

An empty chair — not an advisor. It asks the one thing analysis forgets: who pays the price if this decision is wrong?

The Record

The Decision Clerk

Records the decision, the assumptions, and later what actually happened — so the council becomes a record of your judgment over time.

How I Use It

A seminar that answers your own question

Learning a single philosopher. Toggle everyone off but one to study how that mind alone reasons, then back on for the contrast. “Should I keep a promise that has become costly?” reads very differently through Kant, Mill, and Confucius.

Studying theory and comparing traditions. Point one abstract prompt at the whole council to see a tradition map on a single screen; the Where They Clash field names which two thinkers disagree and on what.

Working through ethics and real decisions. The council returns the core issue, each take, the central disagreement, a recommendation, and the hard question you must answer before acting.

Questions of pure theory. “Is free will compatible with determinism?”, “Does power corrupt, or reveal?” — Aquinas, Nietzsche, and Arendt earn their seats here.

Where They Clash

One question, twelve angles

Asked “Should I keep a promise that has become costly?”, the council split cleanly — Kant held the rule, Mill weighed the harm, Confucius asked what the relationship demands. Then Xiao rendered the verdict.

Xiao's Verdict

“Keep the promise unless breaking it spares someone real and serious harm they never agreed to bear. If you break it, do it openly and carry the cost yourself — that is the difference between a hard choice and a convenient one.”

Under The Hood

How each framework was written

The heart of the project is the per-member framework brief — about 250 words of structured prose that acts as each philosopher's operating manual. All twelve follow the same schema so the voices stay distinct yet comparable: who they were, the seat and lens they hold, the question they always press, what they're best and worst for, their blind spot, how they disagree, and a fixed output shape.

At runtime a prompt builder assembles the active members into one request and requires strict JSON — core issue, per-member verdicts, where they clash, a recommendation, the hard question, and Xiao's spoken verdict. The app is a clone of the Decision Council, re-rostered to twelve philosophers with the guests and books removed.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is the Council of Philosophers?

A local app that sends one question to twelve philosophers spanning roughly 2,400 years, each a distinct reasoning framework, then has an AI oracle named Xiao synthesize the core issue, where the thinkers clash, a recommendation, the hardest unasked question, and a final spoken verdict.

How is it different from the Decision Council?

This council is philosophers only — all twelve are permanent, with no guest advisors and no sacred-text moral seat. The Decision Council mixes philosophers with presidents, CEOs, a field observer, and three books. Both share Xiao, voice, court roles, and the decision log.

How is it built?

It runs locally in Python and Streamlit against the Anthropic Claude API, with optional ElevenLabs voice and browser speech input. Each philosopher is one authored framework block assembled into a single strict-JSON request.

Who built it?

Michael Paycer, a SQL Server DBA and developer in St. Cloud, Minnesota, built it as a personal project, re-rostering his Decision Council framework to twelve philosophers.

The companion council

Need to decide, not just understand?

The Decision Council runs the same engine with a wider room — philosophers plus presidents, CEOs, a field observer, and three sacred books — built to reach a verdict.

Enter the Decision Council →
Related