feat: uncucked my arguments

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Abortion.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.Abortion exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.Abortion exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAbortion =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~2Q~5R),(P),(Q),((R~1F~1~3H)~5M),(F),(~3H),(M~5~3W)%7C=(~3W)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "one consents to becoming pregnant"
@@ -37,29 +37,29 @@ argumentAbortion =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If one consents to becoming pregnant or one consensually engages in sexual activity without contraception, then one is implicitly committed to at least accepting the average risks for the average pregnancy."
-                  , notation = "(P∨Q→R)"
+                  , notation = "P∨Q→R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "One consents to becoming pregnant."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 , { premise = "One consensually engages in sexual activity without contraception."
-                  , notation = "(Q)"
+                  , notation = "Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If one is implicitly committed to at least accepting the average risks for the average pregnancy and one's pregnancy persists long enough for fetal sentience to develop and one's risk profile during pregnancy is not high, then one is morally bound to carrying the pregnancy to term."
-                  , notation = "(R∧F∧¬H→M)"
+                  , notation = "R∧F∧¬H→M"
                   }
                 , { premise = "One's pregnancy persists long enough for fetal sentience to develop."
-                  , notation = "(F)"
+                  , notation = "F"
                   }
                 , { premise = "One's risk profile during pregnancy is not high."
-                  , notation = "(¬H)"
+                  , notation = "¬H"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If one is morally bound to carrying the pregnancy to term, then one's whims are not a sufficient justification for the termination of sentient human life."
-                  , notation = "(M→¬W)"
+                  , notation = "M→¬W"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, one's whims are not a sufficient justification for the termination of sentient human life."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬W)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬W"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Agnosticism.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.Agnosticism exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.Agnosticism exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAgnosticism =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(~3Pxy~5~3Qxy)),(~6x~6y(~3Qxy~5Rxy)),(~3Por)|=(Ror)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x,y)"
           , definiens = "(x) can unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on (y)"
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ argumentAgnosticism =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If one cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on a proposition, then one does does not know why they believe that a proposition is true."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(¬Pxy→¬Qxy))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y(¬Pxy→¬Qxy)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If one does not know why they believe that a proposition is true, then one should temporarily withhold the belief that a proposition is true."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(¬Qxy→Rxy))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y(¬Qxy→Rxy)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The interlocutor cannot unpack what evidence would lead them to change their doxastic attitude on the proposition at hand."
                   , notation = "(¬Por)"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, the interlocutor should temporarily withhold the belief that the proposition at hand is true."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Ror)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Ror"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/AgriculturalPredation.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AgriculturalPredation exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.AgriculturalPredation exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAgriculturalPredation =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y~6z(Px~4Qxyz~1(Rxyz~2Sxyz)~1Wxyz)),(Qahl),(Rahl~2Sahl),(Wahl)%7C=(Pa)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) counts as predation"
@@ -49,20 +49,20 @@ argumentAgriculturalPredation =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "Something counts as predation if, and only if, something involves an animal regularly capturing, killing or subduing, and consuming, to the captor's benefit, another animal."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y∀z(Px↔Qxyz∧(Rxyz∨Sxyz)∧Wxyz))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y∀z(Px↔Qxyz∧(Rxyz∨Sxyz)∧Wxyz)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Animal agriculture involves humans regularly capturing livestock."
-                  , notation = "(Qahl)"
+                  , notation = "Qahl"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Animal agriculture involves humans regularly killing or subduing livestock."
-                  , notation = "(Rahl∨Sahl)"
+                  , notation = "Rahl∨Sahl"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Animal agriculture involves humans regularly consuming, to the captors' benefit, livestock."
-                  , notation = "(Wahl)"
+                  , notation = "Wahl"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, animal agriculture counts as predation."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pa)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pa"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/AnabolicKeto.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.AnabolicKeto exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.AnabolicKeto exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAnabolicKeto =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "A higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets, reducing the amount available for hypertrophy. This likely costs anabolic potential on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P),(Q~5R)|=(R)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "a higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets"
@@ -25,17 +25,17 @@ argumentAnabolicKeto =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If a higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets, then a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If a lower proportion of amino acids are available for hypertrophy on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets, then ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets."
-                  , notation = "(Q→R)"
+                  , notation = "Q→R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "A higher proportion of amino acids are spent on gluconeogenesis while on ketogenic diets compared to non-ketogenic diets."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, ketogenic diets are likely to cost anabolic potential compared to non-ketogenic diets."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "∴R"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/AnimalRights.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AnimalRights exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.AnimalRights exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAnimalRights =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5~3Qx)),(~3Pa~5~7t(Rta~5(Rth~5~3Ph))),(~3~7t(Rta~5(Rth~5~3Ph))),(Pa)|=(~3Qa)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) has moral worth"
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ argumentAnimalRights =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a being has moral worth, then we should not exploit it to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→¬Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→¬Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If animals don’t have moral worth, then there exists a trait that is absent in animals such that if it were absent in humans, humans wouldn’t have moral worth."
-                  , notation = "(¬Pa→∃t(Rta→(Rth→¬Ph)))"
+                  , notation = "¬Pa→∃t(Rta→(Rth→¬Ph))"
                   }
                 , { premise = "There doesn’t exist a trait that is absent in animals such that if it were absent in humans, humans wouldn’t have moral worth"
-                  , notation = "(¬∃t(Rta→(Rth→¬Ph)))"
+                  , notation = "¬∃t(Rta→(Rth→¬Ph))"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, we should not exploit animals to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Qa)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Qa"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/AntagonisticPleiotropy.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.AntagonisticPleiotropy exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.AntagonisticPleiotropy exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAntagonisticPleiotropy =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods, which makes the long-term negative consequences of antagonistic pleiotropy a greater concern for ancestral foods."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(Q~5R),(P)|=(R)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods"
@@ -25,17 +25,17 @@ argumentAntagonisticPleiotropy =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods, then antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If antagonistic pleiotropy is more of a concern for ancestral foods than novel foods, then ancestral diets have inherent disadvantages over novel diets."
-                  , notation = "(Q→R)"
+                  , notation = "Q→R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Humans have more genetic adaptations to ancestral foods than novel foods."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, ancestral foods have inherent disadvantages over novel foods"
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "R"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/AntiRewilding.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AntiRewilding exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.AntiRewilding exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAntiRewilding =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5~3Qx)),(Pa),(~3Qa~5~3R),(~3R~5Sa)|=(Sa)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) has negative rights"
@@ -34,20 +34,20 @@ argumentAntiRewilding =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a being has negative rights, then we should not defend a being from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→¬Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→¬Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Sentient animals have negative rights."
-                  , notation = "(Pa)"
+                  , notation = "Pa"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If we should not defend sentient animals from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans, then it is not permissible to subject sentient animals to conditions that are likely to involve predation, starvation, or death due to environmental exposure to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans."
-                  , notation = "(¬Qa→¬R)"
+                  , notation = "¬Qa→¬R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If it is not permissible to subject sentient animals to conditions that are likely to involve predation, starvation, or death due to environmental exposure to any greater degree than we would tolerate for humans, then rewilding sentient animals is immoral."
-                  , notation = "(¬R→Sa)"
+                  , notation = "¬R→Sa"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, rewilding sentient animals is immoral."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Sa)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Sa"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/AntiVandalism.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AntiVandalism exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.AntiVandalism exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentAntiVandalism =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P),(Q~5R)%7C=(R)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "zoos must spend extra money cleaning graffiti"
@@ -25,17 +25,17 @@ argumentAntiVandalism =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If zoos must spend extra money cleaning graffiti, then zoos will have less money to devote to animal care."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If zoos will have less money to devote to animal care, then vandalizing zoos increases the probability of harming the animals they keep."
-                  , notation = "(Q→R)"
+                  , notation = "Q→R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Zoos must spend extra money cleaning graffiti."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, vandalizing zoos increases the probability of harming the animals they keep."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "R"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/ApoBCVD.elm

@@ -1,37 +1,15 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Medicine.ApoBCVD exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.ApoBCVD exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 
 argumentApoBCVD : Argument
 argumentApoBCVD =
-    let
-        argumentNotation : ArgumentStructure
-        argumentNotation =
-            { notationP1 = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
-            , notationP2 = "Qw"
-            , notationP3 = ""
-            , notationP4 = ""
-            , notationP5 = ""
-            , notationP6 = ""
-            , notationP7 = ""
-            , notationP8 = ""
-            , notationP9 = ""
-            , notationP10 = ""
-            , notationC = "Pw"
-            }
-    in
     { argumentTitle = "Argument for Atherogenic ApoB"
     , propositionTitle = "ApoB-containing lipoproteins dose-dependently cause atherosclerosis."
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "ApoB-containing lipoproteins consistently and proportionately associate with increased plaque volume after controlling for relevant confounders, which satisfies the conditions outlined for an exposure to cause atherosclerosis."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qw)|=(Pw)"
-    , proofText =
-        argumentNotation.notationP1
-            ++ ", "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationP2
-            ++ ", ∴ "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationC
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) dose-dependently causes atherosclerosis"
@@ -49,14 +27,14 @@ argumentApoBCVD =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a substance dose-dependently causes atherosclerosis if, and only if, a substance consistently, linearly, and proportionately associates with increased plaque volume after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP1
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "ApoB-containing lipoproteins consistently, linearly, and proportionately associates with increased plaque volume after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP2
+                  , notation = "Qw"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, ApoB-containing lipoproteins dose-dependently cause atherosclerosis."
-          , conclusionNotation = argumentNotation.notationC
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pw"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/BoobyTrapPagers.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Politics.BoobyTrapPagers exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.BoobyTrapPagers exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentBoobyTrapPagers =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4(Qx~1Rx~1Sx))),(Qp),(Rp),(~3Sp)|=(~3Pp)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is a booby-trap"
@@ -34,20 +34,20 @@ argumentBoobyTrapPagers =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a device is a booby-trap if, and only if, the device is a device or material AND the device is designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure AND x functions (as a device or material that was designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure) when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently safe act."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔(Qx∧Rx∧Sx)))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔(Qx∧Rx∧Sx))"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The Israeli pagers were devices or materials."
-                  , notation = "(Qp)"
+                  , notation = "Qp"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The Israeli pagers were designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure."
-                  , notation = "(Rp)"
+                  , notation = "Rp"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The Israeli pagers did not function (as devices or materials that were designed, constructed, or adapted to kill or injure) when a person disturbs or approaches an apparently safe act."
-                  , notation = "(¬Sp)"
+                  , notation = "¬Sp"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, the Israeli pagers were not booby-traps."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Pp)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Pp"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/CarbsObesity.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.CarbsObesity exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.CarbsObesity exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentCarbsObesity =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "There are a number of predictions made from the hypothesis that carbohydrates uniquely cause obesity. One of those predictions is that obesity would track with carbohydrate intake, but it doesn't"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q)|=(~3P)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "carbs uniquely cause fat accumulation or obesity"
@@ -22,14 +22,14 @@ argumentCarbsObesity =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If carbohydrates uniquely cause fat accumulation or obesity, then, populations with high carbohydrate diets have uniquely higher rates of obesity after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Populations with high carbohydrate diets do not have uniquely higher rates of obesity after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(¬Q)"
+                  , notation = "¬Q"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, carbs do not uniquely cause fat accumulation or obesity."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬P)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬P"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/ColonizingNature.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.ColonizingNature exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.ColonizingNature exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentColonizingNature =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~1~3Q~1~3R~1~3S~5W),(P),(~3Q),(~3R),(~3S)%7C=(W)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "the natural world contains intolerable rights violations"
@@ -31,23 +31,23 @@ argumentColonizingNature =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If the natural world contains intolerable rights violations and we do not know that nature is net positive or net negative for utility and there is not any known practical means by which to end the rights violations beyond the use of force and the natural world is not currently instrumentally vital to facilitating human flourishing, then we are justified in displacing nature into non-existence."
-                  , notation = "(P∧¬Q∧¬R∧¬S→W)"
+                  , notation = "(P∧¬Q∧¬R∧¬S)→W"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Nature entails intolerable rights violations."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 , { premise = "We do not know if nature is net positive or net negative for utility."
-                  , notation = "(¬Q)"
+                  , notation = "¬Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "There is not any known practical means by which to end the rights violations beyond the use of force."
-                  , notation = "(¬R)"
+                  , notation = "¬R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The natural world is not currently instrumentally vital to facilitating human flourishing."
-                  , notation = "(¬S)"
+                  , notation = "¬S"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, we are justified in displacing nature into non-existence."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(W∴)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "W"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/CropDeaths.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.CropDeaths exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.CropDeaths exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentCropDeaths =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "We can't claim to know that cropland kills more animals than wildland, because if we did know this, there would be evidence for it, and there isn't any such evidence."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q)%7C=(~3P)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "it is known that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland"
@@ -22,14 +22,14 @@ argumentCropDeaths =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If it is known that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland, then there is evidence that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "There is not evidence that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, it is not known that cropland leads to more animal death than wildland."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬P)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬P"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/DairyCowRape.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.DairyCowRape exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.DairyCowRape exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentDairyCowRape =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Px~4(Qxy~1~3Ryx))),(Qae),(~3Rea)|=(Pa)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) qualifies as rape"
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ argumentDairyCowRape =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "An action qualifies as rape if, and only if, the action involves sexual contact with an involved party and the involved party does not render informed consent for the action."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(Px↔(Qxy∧¬Ryx)))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y(Px↔(Qxy∧¬Ryx))"
                   }
                 , { premise = "A bull mating with a cow involves sexual contact with a cow."
-                  , notation = "(Qae)"
+                  , notation = "Qae"
                   }
                 , { premise = "A cow does not render informed consent to a bull mating with a cow."
-                  , notation = "(¬Rea)"
+                  , notation = "¬Rea"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, a bull mating with a cow qualifies as rape."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pa)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pa"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/DietaryCholesterol.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.DietaryCholesterol exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.DietaryCholesterol exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentDietaryCholesterol =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "LDL causally associates with heart disease in a linear and proportional manner, and in all cases exposures that durably increase LDL over time produce likewise increases in heart disease risk. Dietary cholesterol is one such exposure."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5Qx)),(Pd)|=(Qd)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "consuming high amounts of (x) increases LDL"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentDietaryCholesterol =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if consuming high amounts of a substance increases LDL, then consuming high amounts of a substance increases heart disease risk."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Consuming high amounts of dietary cholesterol increases LDL."
-                  , notation = "(Pd)"
+                  , notation = "Pd"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, consuming high amounts of dietary cholesterol increases heart disease risk."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Qd)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Qd"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/EfilismPatrolSquad.elm

@@ -1,43 +1,15 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.EfilismPatrolSquad exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.EfilismPatrolSquad exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 
 argumentEfilismPatrolSquad : Argument
 argumentEfilismPatrolSquad =
-    let
-        argumentNotation : ArgumentStructure
-        argumentNotation =
-            { notationP1 = "P→Q"
-            , notationP2 = "¬Q"
-            , notationP3 = "¬P∧R→¬S"
-            , notationP4 = "R"
-            , notationP5 = "¬S→W"
-            , notationP6 = ""
-            , notationP7 = ""
-            , notationP8 = ""
-            , notationP9 = ""
-            , notationP10 = ""
-            , notationC = "W"
-            }
-    in
     { argumentTitle = "The Eternal Intergalactic Sentience Patrol Squad"
     , propositionTitle = "Efilists are committed to pragmatic natalism."
     , propositionReductio = "Efilists fundamentally believe that sentient life is inherently characterized by suffering and that the most ethical action is to prevent the creation of any new sentient beings, ultimately aiming to completely eliminate all conscious life in the universe to end suffering permanently."
     , propositionSummary = "If efilists follow their own logic to its ultimate conclusion, they would paradoxically be committed to a form of pragmatic natalism - the very opposite of their core philosophical stance."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q),(~3P~1R~5~3S),(R),(~3S~5W)|=(W)"
-    , proofText =
-        argumentNotation.notationP1
-            ++ ", "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationP2
-            ++ ", "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationP3
-            ++ ", "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationP4
-            ++ ", "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationP5
-            ++ ", ∴ "
-            ++ argumentNotation.notationC
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "humans abstaining from procreation maximally reduces rights violations"
@@ -58,23 +30,23 @@ argumentEfilismPatrolSquad =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If humans abstaining from procreation maximally reduces rights violations, then humans have sterilized all sentient life in the universe."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP1
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Humans have not sterilized all sentient life in the universe."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP2
+                  , notation = "¬Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If humans abstaining from procreation does not maximally reduce rights violations and many more generations are required to sterilize all sentient life in the universe, then efilists should not abstain from procreation until all sentient life in the universe is sterilized."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP3
+                  , notation = "¬P∧R→¬S"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Many more generations are required to sterilize all sentient life in the universe."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP4
+                  , notation = "R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If efilists should not abstain from procreation until all sentient life in the universe is sterilized, then efilists are committed to pragmatic natalism."
-                  , notation = argumentNotation.notationP5
+                  , notation = "¬S→W"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, efilists are committed to pragmatic natalism."
-          , conclusionNotation = argumentNotation.notationC
+          , conclusionNotation = "W"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/EpidemiologyCausality.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Science.EpidemiologyCausality exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.EpidemiologyCausality exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentEpidemiologyCausality =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5Qx)),(Pe)|=(Qe)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) consistently identifies associations that are later confirmed by randomized controlled trials"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentEpidemiologyCausality =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a research method consistently identifies associations that are later confirmed by randomized controlled trials, then the research method generally provides good causal estimates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Nutritional epidemiology consistently identifies associations that are later confirmed by randomized controlled trials."
-                  , notation = "(P)e"
+                  , notation = "Pe"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, nutritional epidemiology generally provides good causal estimates."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Qe)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Qe"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/EthicalSlurs.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.EthicalSlurs exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.EthicalSlurs exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentEthicalSlurs =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(~6x(~3Px~5Rx)),(~3Pr),(~3Qr~1Rr~5Sr),(Sr~5Wr)|=(Wr)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x)'s negative connotations have been neutralised"
@@ -37,23 +37,23 @@ argumentEthicalSlurs =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all slurs, a slur's negative connotations have been neutralised if, and only if, slur has been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "For all slurs, if it is not the case that slur's negative connotations have been neutralised, then oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of slur."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(¬Px→Rx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(¬Px→Rx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "It is not the case that the term retard's negative connotations have been neutralised."
-                  , notation = "(¬Pr)"
+                  , notation = "¬Pr"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If the term retard has not been rendered non-bigoted via altered usage and oppressed people will continue to suffer from the use of the term retard, then it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations."
-                  , notation = "(¬Qr∧Rr→Sr)"
+                  , notation = "¬Qr∧Rr→Sr"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If it is permissible to neutralise the term retard's negative connotations, then It is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning."
-                  , notation = "(Sr→Wr)"
+                  , notation = "Sr→Wr"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, it is generally permissible to use the term retard with an altered non-bigoted meaning."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Wr)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Wr"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/FineTuning.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.FineTuning exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.FineTuning exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentFineTuning =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5Qx)),(Pg),(Qg~5R)%7C=(R)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is finely tuned"
@@ -31,17 +31,17 @@ argumentFineTuning =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If something is finely tuned, then something has a designer."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "God's constitution is finely tuned."
-                  , notation = "(Pg)"
+                  , notation = "Pg"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If God's constitution has a designer, then fine tuning is an infinitely regressive explanation for God."
-                  , notation = "(Qg→R)"
+                  , notation = "Qg→R"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, fine tuning is an infinitely regressive explanation for God."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "R"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/FlatEarthDebunk.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Science.FlatEarthDebunk exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.FlatEarthDebunk exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentFlatEarthDebunk =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "The argument is structured to demonstrate that, within the context of a flat Earth model, if the stars are perceived as rotating counter-clockwise from the center, they cannot also be perceived as rotating clockwise from any point on the Earth."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y~6z(Pxy~5(Qyz~5Rxz))),(Pkt~1Qta),(Rka~5~3Ska)|=(~3Ska)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x,y)"
           , definiens = "(x) is perceived as rotating counter-clockwise from point (y)"
@@ -46,17 +46,17 @@ argumentFlatEarthDebunk =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If an object is perceived as rotating counter-clockwise from vantage point A, then, for all vantage points B, if vantage point A is on the same side of the rotational plane as vantage points B, then the object will be perceived as rotating counter-clockwise from vantage points B, as long as you are looking towards the rotational plane."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y∀z(Pxy→(Qyz→Rxz)))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y∀z(Pxy→(Qyz→Rxz))"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The stars in the sky are perceived as rotating counter-clockwise from the center of the flat Earth and the center of the flat Earth is on the same side of the rotational plane as anywhere else on the flat Earth."
-                  , notation = "(Pkt∧Qta)"
+                  , notation = "Pkt∧Qta"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If the stars in the sky are perceived as rotating counter-clockwise from anywhere else on the flat Earth, as long as you are looking towards the rotational plane, then the stars in the sky will not be perceived as rotating clockwise from anywhere else on the flat Earth, as long as you are looking towards the rotational plane."
-                  , notation = "(Rka→¬Ska)"
+                  , notation = "Rka→¬Ska"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, the stars in the sky will not be perceived as rotating clockwise from anywhere else on the flat Earth, as long as you are looking towards the rotational plane."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Ska)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Ska"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/FructoseNAFLD.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.FructoseNAFLD exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.FructoseNAFLD exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentFructoseNAFLD =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Experimental investigations into fructose overfeeding have consistently failed to produce a fatty liver phenotype in humans. This suggests that fructose, contrary to popular belief in some domains, does not uniquely cause fatty liver disease."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5~3Q),(P)|=(~3Q)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "experimental investigations into fructose overfeeding consistently fail to recreate a fatty liver phenotype in humans"
@@ -22,14 +22,14 @@ argumentFructoseNAFLD =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If experimental investigations into fructose overfeeding consistently fail to recreate a fatty liver phenotype in humans, then fructose does not seem to uniquely cause fatty liver disease."
-                  , notation = "(P→¬Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→¬Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Experimental investigations into fructose overfeeding consistently fail to recreate a fatty liver phenotype in humans."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, fructose does not seem to uniquely cause fatty liver disease."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Q)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Q"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthPromotingFoods.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthPromotingFoods exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthPromotingFoods exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ argumentHealthPromotingFoods =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Given that food is, by its very definition, material that provides essential nutrients and energy to sustain bodily functions and growth, it follows that anything classified as food must be inherently health-promoting by its very nature."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P)|=(Q)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "food is defined as material consisting essentially of protein, carbohydrate, and/or fat used in the body of an organism to sustain growth, repair, and vital processes and to furnish energy"
@@ -21,14 +21,14 @@ argumentHealthPromotingFoods =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If food is defined as material consisting essentially of protein, carbohydrate, and/or fat used in the body of an organism to sustain growth, repair, and vital processes and to furnish energy, then all foods are definitionally health-promoting."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Food is defined as material consisting essentially of protein, carbohydrate, and/or fat used in the body of an organism to sustain growth, repair, and vital processes and to furnish energy."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, all foods are definitionally health-promoting."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Q)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Q"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthSeeker.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthSeeker exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthSeeker exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthSeeker =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "If someone values consuming ancestral foods over novel foods because they have the overall value of reducing disease risk, but a novel food reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food, they would be acting against their values by rejecting the novel food."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~7x(Px)~1~7y(Qy)~5~6x~6y(~3Rxy~5Sx)),(~7x(Px)),(~7y(Qy))|=(~6x~6y(~3Rxy~5Sx))"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of (y) because they value reducing disease risk"
@@ -34,17 +34,17 @@ argumentHealthSeeker =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If there exists someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk, and there exists a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food, then if that person is not in favour of consuming that novel food, then that person would be acting against their values."
-                  , notation = "(∃x(Px)∧∃y(Qy)→∀x∀y(¬Rxy→Sx))"
+                  , notation = "∃x(Px)∧∃y(Qy)→∀x∀y(¬Rxy→Sx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "There exists someone who favours consuming ancestral foods to the exclusion of novel foods because they value reducing disease risk."
-                  , notation = "(∃x(Px))"
+                  , notation = "∃x(Px)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "There exists a novel food that reduces disease risk when replacing an ancestral food."
-                  , notation = "(∃y(Qy))"
+                  , notation = "∃y(Qy)"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, if that person is not in favour of consuming that novel food, then that person would be acting against their values."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴∀x∀y(¬Rxy→Sx))"
+          , conclusionNotation = "∀x∀y(¬Rxy→Sx)"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthyChocolate.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyChocolate exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthyChocolate exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthyChocolate =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Despite chocolate containing high amounts of saturated fat, populations that consume more chocolate do not exhibit higher rates of atherosclerosis, suggesting that chocolate does not have the same effect on heart disease risk as most other saturated fat sources."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5Qx)),(~3Qc)|=(~3Pc)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) causes atherosclerosis"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentHealthyChocolate =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a high saturated fat food causes atherosclerosis, then populations consuming more of this high saturated fat food have higher rates of atherosclerosis after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Populations consuming more chocolate do not have higher rates of atherosclerosis after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(¬Qc)"
+                  , notation = "¬Qc"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, chocolate does not cause atherosclerosis."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Pc)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Pc"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthyDairy.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyDairy exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthyDairy exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ argumentHealthyDairy =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "The diet-heart hypothesis would predict that populations consuming more dairy foods should have higher rates of the disease. However, even when you account for factors that could plausibly influence the results, non-churned, non-homogenized dairy have been shown to consistently reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality, strongly suggesting that they directly contribute to better health outcomes, particularly with respect to cardiovascular disease and colorectal cancer."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5Qx)),(~3Qh)|=(~3Ph)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) causes atherosclerosis"
@@ -27,14 +27,14 @@ argumentHealthyDairy =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a high saturated fat food causes atherosclerosis, then populations consuming more of the high saturated fat food have higher rates of atherosclerosis after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Populations consuming more non-churned, non-homogenized dairy do not have higher rates of atherosclerosis after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(¬Qh)"
+                  , notation = "¬Qh"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, non-churned, non-homogenized dairy do not cause atherosclerosis."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Ph)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Ph"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthyFattyFish.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyFattyFish exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthyFattyFish exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthyFattyFish =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Even when you account for factors that could plausibly influence the results, fatty fish have been shown to consistently reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality, strongly suggesting that they directly contribute to better health outcomes, particularly with respect to cardiovascular disease."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qf)|=(Pf)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly healthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentHealthyFattyFish =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly healthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Fatty fish consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qf)"
+                  , notation = "Qf"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, fatty fish is overwhelmingly healthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pf)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pf"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthyFibre.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyFibre exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthyFibre exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthyFibre =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Even when you account for factors that could plausibly influence the results, both refined and whole fibre have been shown to consistently reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality, strongly suggesting that they directly contribute to better health outcomes, particularly with respect to cardiovascular disease."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qb)|=(Pb)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly healthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentHealthyFibre =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly healthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Fibre, whether whole or refined, consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qb)"
+                  , notation = "Qb"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, fibre, whether whole or refined, is overwhelmingly healthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pb)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pb"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthyFood.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyFood exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthyFood exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthyFood =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "A food is considered healthier than another in a specific context if it increases the time before illness or disease sets in when replacing the other food. On a desert island, since Pepsi can extend the time before starvation compared to leafy greens, it is considered healthier than leafy greens in that context."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y~6z~6w(Pxyw~4Qwxzy)),(Qdpsl)|=(Ppld)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x,y,w)"
           , definiens = "(x) is healthy compared to (w) when in (y)"
@@ -46,14 +46,14 @@ argumentHealthyFood =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "A given a food is healthy compared to another given food when in a given context if, and only if, when within that context, the consumption of that given a food is likely to increase the lag-time to the onset of illness, disease, or infirmity when replacing a given other food."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y∀z∀w(Pxyw↔Qwxzy))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y∀z∀w(Pxyw↔Qwxzy)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "When trapped on a desert island the consumption of Pepsi increases the lag-time to the onset of starvation when replacing leafy greens."
-                  , notation = "(Qdpsl)"
+                  , notation = "Qdpsl"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, Pepsi is healthy compared to leafy greens when trapped on a desert island."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Ppld)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Ppld"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthyPlantFoods.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyPlantFoods exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthyPlantFoods exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthyPlantFoods =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Since whole plant foods consistently consistently associate with reduced risk of illness and death, it is reasonable to conclude that whole plant foods are overwhelmingly healthy."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qf)|=(Pf)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly healthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentHealthyPlantFoods =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly healthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Whole plant foods consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qw)"
+                  , notation = "Qw"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, whole plant foods are overwhelmingly healthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pw)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pw"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthySeedOils.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthySeedOils exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthySeedOils exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthySeedOils =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Even when you account for factors that could plausibly influence the results, non-hydrogenated vegetable oils have been shown to consistently reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality, strongly suggesting that they directly contribute to better health outcomes."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5Qx)),(Pv)|=(Qv)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly healthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentHealthySeedOils =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly healthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Non-hydrogenated vegetable oils consistently associate with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Pv)"
+                  , notation = "Pv"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, non-hydrogenated vegetable oils are overwhelmingly healthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Qv)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Qv"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/HealthySoy.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthySoy exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.HealthySoy exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentHealthySoy =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Even when you account for factors that could plausibly influence the results, non-hydrogenated soy products have been shown to consistently reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality, strongly suggesting that they directly contribute to better health outcomes, particularly with respect to cardiovascular disease."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qs)|=(Ps)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly healthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentHealthySoy =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly healthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Soy products consistently associate with a reduced risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qs)"
+                  , notation = "Qs"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, soy products are overwhelmingly healthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Ps)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Ps"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/ImmortalityReductio.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.ImmortalityReductio exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.ImmortalityReductio exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentImmortalityReductio =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Hx~5~3Rxy)),(Hs)%7C=(~3Rsd)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "humans undergo (x)"
@@ -34,14 +34,14 @@ argumentImmortalityReductio =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If humans undergo a normal physiological process, then the normal physiological process does not result in a negative health outcome."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(Px→¬Qxy))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y(Px→¬Qxy)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Humans undergo senescence."
-                  , notation = "(Ps)"
+                  , notation = "Ps"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, senescence does not result in death."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Qsd)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Qsd"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Malondialdehyde.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.Malondialdehyde exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.Malondialdehyde exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentMalondialdehyde =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "If one takes the view that in order for a substance to increase the risk of atherosclerosis, it must facilitate the oxidative modification of LDL particles via malondialdehyde production, and one also affirms that omega-3s are anti-atherogenic, then this would imply that all fatty acids that produce malondialdehyde, including omega-3s, must also be atherogenic, which contradicts the their belief that omega-3s are heart-healthy."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qm),(Pm~5~6x(Rx))%7C=(Ro)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) increases the risk of atherosclerosis"
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ argumentMalondialdehyde =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "A substance increases the risk of atherosclerosis if, and only if, that substance facilitates the oxidative modification of LDL particles."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Malondialdehyde facilitates the oxidative modification of LDL particles."
-                  , notation = "(Qm)"
+                  , notation = "Qm"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If malondialdehyde increases the risk of atherosclerosis, then all malondialdehyde-producing fatty acids are atherogenic."
-                  , notation = "(Pm→∀y(Ry))"
+                  , notation = "Pm→∀y(Ry)"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, omega-3s are atherogenic."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Ro)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Ro"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/OddOrderPredators.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.OddOrderPredators exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.OddOrderPredators exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentOddOrderPredators =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~5~3Qx)),(Pa),(~3Qa~5R)%7C=(R)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) has negative rights"
@@ -31,17 +31,17 @@ argumentOddOrderPredators =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if something has negative rights, then we should not defend it from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px→¬Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px→¬Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Animals have negative rights."
-                  , notation = "(Pa)"
+                  , notation = "Pa"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If we should not defend animals from rights violations to any lesser degree than we would tolerate for humans, then it is permissible to prevent predation with lethal force to the same degree we would tolerate for humans."
-                  , notation = "(¬Qa→R)"
+                  , notation = "¬Qa→R"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, it is permissible to prevent predation with lethal force to the same degree we would tolerate for humans."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴R)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "R"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Omega3Omega6Ratio.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.Omega3Omega6Ratio exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.Omega3Omega6Ratio exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ argumentOmega3Omega6Ratio =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "More often than not, the associated risks of a high omega-6/omega-3 ratio are better explained by omega-3 alone. In multivariable analyses, the ratio looks like it matters, but in univariable anaylses, low omega-3 is almost always driving the risk via lowering the denominator."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(~3Q)|=(~3P)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "increases or decreases in disease risk associated with a high or low omega-6/omega-3 ratio are better explained by changes in omega-3 alone"
@@ -21,14 +21,14 @@ argumentOmega3Omega6Ratio =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If increases or decreases in disease risk associated with a high or low omega-6/omega-3 ratio are better explained by changes in omega-3 alone, then the omega-6/omega-3 ratio is not likely to matter for health."
-                  , notation = "(P→¬Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→¬Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Increases or decreases in disease risk associated with a high or low omega-6/omega-3 ratio are better explained by changes in omega-3 alone."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, the omega-6/omega-3 ratio is not likely to matter for health."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Q)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Q"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Ostroveganism.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.Ostroveganism exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.Ostroveganism exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentOstroveganism =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx~1Rx~1(Sx~2Wx))),(Qc~1~3Rc~1Sc~1~3Wc),(~3Pc~5~6x(~3Tx))|=(~3Tb)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) counts as a brain"
@@ -46,17 +46,17 @@ argumentOstroveganism =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "Something counts as a brain if, and only if, something is a complex network of interconnected neurons, integrates neuronal pathways from multiple sensory organs, and presents with distinct functional regions or nuclei with white matter tracts that facilitate inter-regional communication."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx∧Rx∧(Sx∨Wx)))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔(Qx∧Rx∧(Sx∨Wx)))"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Cerebral ganglia meet criteria one and three, but not criteria two and four."
-                  , notation = "(Qc∧¬Rc∧Sc∧¬Wc)"
+                  , notation = "Qc∧¬Rc∧Sc∧¬Wc"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If cerebral ganglia do not count as brains, then the corresponding brainless biological system into which the cerebral ganglia are integrated is not likely to be sentient."
-                  , notation = "(¬Pc→∀x(¬Tx))"
+                  , notation = "¬Pc→∀x(¬Tx)"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, bivalves are not likely to be sentient."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Tb)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Tb"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/PlantBasedCVDReversal.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.PlantBasedCVDReversal exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.PlantBasedCVDReversal exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentPlantBasedCVDReversal =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "To date, there is not a single case of supposed heart disease reversal from a plant-based diet that is actually compatible with  established definitions of heart disease reversal in the literature."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~1~3Q~5~3R),(P),(~3Q)|=(~3R)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "there are established definitions for atherosclerosis reversal in the domain of cardiology"
@@ -25,17 +25,17 @@ argumentPlantBasedCVDReversal =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If there are established definitions for atherosclerosis reversal in the domain of cardiology and current research on plant-based diets and atherosclerosis reversal do not satisfy the definitions for atherosclerosis reversal in the domain of cardiology, then plant-based diets do not appear to clinically reverse atherosclerosis."
-                  , notation = "(P∧¬Q→¬R)"
+                  , notation = "P∧¬Q→¬R"
                   }
                 , { premise = "There are established definitions for atherosclerosis reversal in the domain of cardiology."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Current research on plant-based diets and atherosclerosis reversal do not satisfy the definitions for atherosclerosis reversal in the domain of cardiology."
-                  , notation = "(¬Q)"
+                  , notation = "¬Q"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, plant-based diets do not appear to clinically reverse atherosclerosis."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬R)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬R"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/PollinationReductio.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.PollinationReductio exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.PollinationReductio exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentPollinationReductio =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4~3Qx)),(Qb),(~3Pb~5~6y(~3Ry))|=(~3Ra)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is vegan"
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ argumentPollinationReductio =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "Something is vegan if, and only if, something does not involve human on non-human animal exploitation."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔¬Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔¬Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Bees pollinating human crops involves human on non-human exploitation."
-                  , notation = "(Qb)"
+                  , notation = "Qb"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If bees pollinating human crops is not vegan, then the products generated are not vegan."
-                  , notation = "(¬Pb→∀y(¬Ry))"
+                  , notation = "¬Pb→∀y(¬Ry)"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, apples are not vegan."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Ra)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Ra"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/PolyphenolReductio.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.PolyphenolReductio exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.PolyphenolReductio exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentPolyphenolReductio =
     , propositionReductio = "asdasd"
     , propositionSummary = "If one is committed to the notions that polyphenols in plants are bad for humans, and that grass-fed red meat is the healthiest available type of red meat, then they're pragmatically committed to being pro-GMO to lower the grass-derived polyphenol content of grass-fed beef."
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x~6y(Px~1Qxy~5Rxy)),(Pp),(Qpg),(Rpg~5Spg),(Spg~5Wp)|=(Wp)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is harmful"
@@ -43,23 +43,23 @@ argumentPolyphenolReductio =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If plant defense chemicals are harmful and plant defense chemicals are contained in a food, then plant defense chemicals render the food harmful."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(Px∧Qxy→Rxy))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y(Px∧Qxy→Rxy)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Polyphenols from grass are harmful."
-                  , notation = "(Pp)"
+                  , notation = "Pp"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Polyphenols from grass are contained in grass-fed beef."
-                  , notation = "(Qpg)"
+                  , notation = "Qpg"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If polyphenols from grass render grass-fed beef harmful, then genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful."
-                  , notation = "(Rpg→Spg)"
+                  , notation = "Rpg→Spg"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If genetic modification that removes polyphenols from grass renders grass-fed beef less harmful, then health-conscious, anti-polyphenol, ancestral diet advocates are committed to favouring GMOs."
-                  , notation = "(Spg→Wp)"
+                  , notation = "Spg→Wp"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, health-conscious, anti-polyphenol, ancestral diet advocates are committed to favouring GMOs."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Wp)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Wp"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/ScratcherPioneers.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.ScratcherPioneers exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.ScratcherPioneers exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentScratcherPioneers =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx~2Rx~2Sx)),(Qt),(Rt),(St)%7C=(Pt)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is a scratcher"
@@ -34,20 +34,20 @@ argumentScratcherPioneers =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "A tattoo artist is a scratcher if, and only if, the tattoo artist tattoos without a license and/or one tattoos without observing basic health standards and/or one tattoos without having undertaken apprenticeship."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx∨Rx∨Sx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx∨Rx∨Sx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The original trailblazers of modern tattooing tattooed without licenses."
-                  , notation = "(Qt)"
+                  , notation = "Qt"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The original trailblazers of modern tattooing tattooed without observing basic health standards."
-                  , notation = "(Rt)"
+                  , notation = "Rt"
                   }
                 , { premise = "The original trailblazers of modern tattooing tattooed without having undertaken apprenticeship."
-                  , notation = "(St)"
+                  , notation = "St"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, the original trailblazers of modern tattooing were scratchers."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pt)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pt"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/SodiumCVD.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.SodiumCVD exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.SodiumCVD exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ argumentSodiumCVD =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "In all of the strongest analysis on the relationship between sodium intake and cardiovascular disease risk, there is a linear and proportional relationship. Particularly when the strongest measurement methods are used, such as multiple 24-hour urinary collections."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~1Q~5Rx)),(Ps),(Q)|=(Rs)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) consistently raises blood pressure in controlled studies"
@@ -30,17 +30,17 @@ argumentSodiumCVD =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a substance consistently raises blood pressure in controlled studies and elevated blood pressure is known to cause cardiovascular disease, then higher intakes of that substance increases cardiovascular disease risk."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px∧Q→Rx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px∧Q→Rx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Sodium consistently raises blood pressure in controlled studies."
-                  , notation = "(Ps)"
+                  , notation = "Ps"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Elevated blood pressure is known to cause cardiovascular disease."
-                  , notation = "(Q)"
+                  , notation = "Q"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, higher intakes of sodium increases cardiovascular disease risk."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Rs)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Rs"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/TMAOCausality.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.TMAOCausality exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.TMAOCausality exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentTMAOCausality =
     , propositionTitle = "TMAO is not likely to be causative of heart disease."
     , propositionSummary = "In the strongest research we have on the relationship between TMAO and heart disease risk, such as with Mendelian randomization and genome-wide associational studies, there is no persuasive causal link between TMAO in the blood and heart disease risk."
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(~3Qt)|=(~3Pt)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is likely to be causative of heart diseas"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentTMAOCausality =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, if a substance is likely to be causative of heart disease if, then the substance consistently associates with an increased risk of heart disease after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "TMAO consistently associates with an increased risk of heart disease after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(¬Qt)"
+                  , notation = "¬Qt"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, TMAO is not likely to be causative of heart disease."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Pt)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Pt"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/Template.elm

@@ -5,12 +5,11 @@ import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
 argument : Argument
 argument =
-    { argumentTitle = "Title"
-    , propositionTitle = "Proposition"
+    { argumentTitle = ""
+    , propositionTitle = ""
     , propositionReductio = ""
-    , propositionSummary = "Summary"
+    , propositionSummary = ""
     , proofLink  = ""
-    , proofText = ""
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = ""
           , definiens = ""
@@ -50,7 +49,7 @@ argument =
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = ""
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴)"
+          , conclusionNotation = ""
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/TransPeople.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.TransPeople exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.TransPeople exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentTransPeople =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Rx~1Wx)),(~6x(Qx~4Sx~1Wx)),(Ra~1Wa),(Sg~1Wg)|=(Pa~1Qg)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "Male"
           , definiens = "the cluster of traits that associate with small, but not large, gametes."
@@ -46,20 +46,20 @@ argumentTransPeople =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "Someone is a woman if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes and someone is over 18 years of age."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Rx∧Wx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Rx∧Wx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Someone is a man if, and only if, someone possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes and someone is over 18 years of age."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Qx↔Sx∧Wx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Qx↔Sx∧Wx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "A trans person of the male sex possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with large gametes than weighted traits that associate with small gametes and a trans person with small gametes is over 18 years of age."
-                  , notation = "(Ra∧Wa)"
+                  , notation = "Ra∧Wa"
                   }
                 , { premise = "A trans person of the female sex possesses a sufficiently greater sum of weighted traits that more closely associate with small gametes than weighted traits that associate with large gametes and a trans person with large gametes is over 18 years of age."
-                  , notation = "(Sg∧Wg)"
+                  , notation = "Sg∧Wg"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, a trans person of the male sex is a woman and a trans person with female sex is a man."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pa∧Qg)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pa∧Qg"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/TruncatedMeta.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Science.TruncatedMeta exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.TruncatedMeta exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentTruncatedMeta =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(P~5Q),(P)%7C=(Q)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "underpowered studies provide weaker causal estimates than adequately powered studies"
@@ -22,14 +22,14 @@ argumentTruncatedMeta =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If underpowered studies provide weaker causal estimates than adequately powered studies, then meta-analytic summations that include adequately powered studies to the exclusion of insufficiently powered studies will provide better causal estimates than meta-analytic summations that include both adequately powered studies and insufficiently powered studies."
-                  , notation = "(P→Q)"
+                  , notation = "P→Q"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Underpowered studies provide weaker causal estimates than adequately powered studies."
-                  , notation = "(P)"
+                  , notation = "P"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, meta-analytic summations that include adequately powered studies to the exclusion of insufficiently powered studies will provide better causal estimates than meta-analytic summations that include both adequately powered studies and insufficiently powered studies."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Q)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Q"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/UnhealthyCoconutOil.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthyCoconutOil exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.UnhealthyCoconutOil exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentUnhealthyCoconutOil =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~1Qx~5~3Rx)),(Pc),(Qc)|=(~3Rc)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P"
           , definiens = "a given (x) increases LDL-C at a similar rate to other saturated fat sources"
@@ -31,17 +31,17 @@ argumentUnhealthyCoconutOil =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "If a given saturated fat source increases LDL-C at a similar rate to other saturated fat sources and and a given saturated fat source has no other known qualities that counteract said increase in LDL-C, then there is not a reason to believe that such a saturated fat source is any better for heart health than other saturated fat sources that increase LDL-C."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px∧Qx→¬Rx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px∧Qx→¬Rx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Coconut oil increases LDL-C at a similar rate to other saturated fat sources."
-                  , notation = "(Pc)"
+                  , notation = "Pc"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Coconut oil has no other known qualities that counteract said increase in LDL-C."
-                  , notation = "(Qc)"
+                  , notation = "Qc"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, there is not a reason to believe that coconut oil is any better for heart health than other saturated fat sources that increase LDL-C."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴¬Rc)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "¬Rc"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/UnhealthyProcessedMeat.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthyProcessedMeat exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.UnhealthyProcessedMeat exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentUnhealthyProcessedMeat =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qs)|=(Ps)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly unhealthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentUnhealthyProcessedMeat =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly unhealthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Processed meat consistently associates with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qs)"
+                  , notation = "Qs"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, processed meat is overwhelmingly unhealthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Ps)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Ps"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/UnhealthyRedMeat.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthyRedMeat exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.UnhealthyRedMeat exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentUnhealthyRedMeat =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qm)|=(Pm)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly unhealthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentUnhealthyRedMeat =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly unhealthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Unprocessed red meat consistently associates with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qm)"
+                  , notation = "Qm"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, unprocessed red meat is overwhelmingly unhealthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pm)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pm"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/UnhealthySaturatedFat.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthySaturatedFat exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.UnhealthySaturatedFat exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentUnhealthySaturatedFat =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4Qx)),(Qf)|=(Pf)"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "(x) is overwhelmingly unhealthy"
@@ -28,14 +28,14 @@ argumentUnhealthySaturatedFat =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, a food is overwhelmingly unhealthy if, and only if, the food consistently associates with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Most sources of saturated fat consistently associates with an increased risk of morbidity and mortality after adjustment or control over relevant confounders and covariates."
-                  , notation = "(Qf)"
+                  , notation = "Qf"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, most sources of saturated fat are overwhelmingly unhealthy."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴Pf)"
+          , conclusionNotation = "Pf"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Arguments/VeganSocietyReductio.elm

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-module Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.VeganSocietyReductio exposing (..)
+module Debate.Arguments.VeganSocietyReductio exposing (..)
 
 import Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
@@ -10,7 +10,7 @@ argumentVeganSocietyReductio =
     , propositionReductio = ""
     , propositionSummary = "Summary"
     , proofLink  = "https://www.umsu.de/trees/#(~6x(Px~4~3Qx)),(~6x~6y(~3Rx~5~3Q(e(y)))),(~3Rg)%7C=(P(e(g)))"
-    , proofText = ""
+    
     , definitionTable =
         [ { definiendum = "P(x)"
           , definiens = "it is vegan to do (x)"
@@ -37,17 +37,17 @@ argumentVeganSocietyReductio =
     , argumentFormalization =
         [ { premises =
                 [ { premise = "For all things, it is vegan to do something if, and only if, that thing does not exploit animals."
-                  , notation = "(∀x(Px↔¬Qx))"
+                  , notation = "∀x(Px↔¬Qx)"
                   }
                 , { premise = "If some beings are not animals, then eating those beings does not exploit animals."
-                  , notation = "(∀x∀y(¬Rx→¬Q(e(y))))"
+                  , notation = "∀x∀y(¬Rx→¬Q(e(y)))"
                   }
                 , { premise = "Groot is not an animal."
-                  , notation = "(¬Rg)"
+                  , notation = "¬Rg"
                   }
                 ]
           , conclusion = "Therefore, it is vegan to eat Groot."
-          , conclusionNotation = "(∴P(e(g)))"
+          , conclusionNotation = "P(e(g))"
           }
         ]
     }

frontend/src/Debate/Helpers.elm

@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ argumentMaker argument =
             (argRows
                 ++ [ column [ paragraphWidth, paddingEach { top = 5, right = 0, bottom = 0, left = 0 } ]
                         [ row [ centerX, E.width fill ]
-                            [ column [ E.alignLeft ]
+                            [ column [ E.alignRight ]
                                 [ newTabLink
                                     (paragraphBoldFormat
                                         ++ [ F.size 18
@@ -218,41 +218,8 @@ argumentMaker argument =
                                     , label = text "Proof Tree"
                                     }
                                 ]
-                            , column [ E.alignRight ]
-                                [ newTabLink
-                                    (paragraphBoldFormat
-                                        ++ [ F.size 18
-                                           , F.color colourTheme.backgroundColour
-                                           , B.color colourTheme.highlightText
-                                           , paddingEach { top = 6, bottom = 2, left = 12, right = 12 }
-                                           , D.width 1
-                                           , D.rounded 20
-                                           , E.width <| px 120
-                                           , F.center
-                                           , transitionStyle
-                                           , mouseOver
-                                                [ B.color colourTheme.highlightTextHover
-                                                , F.color colourTheme.nonHighlightedText
-                                                , D.color colourTheme.highlightTextHover
-                                                ]
-                                           ]
-                                    )
-                                    { url = argument.proofLink
-                                    , label = text "Back to Top"
-                                    }
-                                ]
-                            ], basicDivider
+                            ]
                         ]
                    ]
             )
         ]
-
-
-basicDivider =
-    el
-        [ E.width fill
-        , padding 20
-        , D.widthEach { bottom = 1, top = 0, left = 0, right = 0 }
-        , D.color (rgb255 200 200 200)
-        ]
-        none

frontend/src/Debate/Types.elm

@@ -1,19 +1,11 @@
 module Debate.Types exposing (..)
 
-
-type alias ArgumentCategory =
-    { categoryName : String
-    , arguments : List Argument
-    }
-
-
 type alias Argument =
     { argumentTitle : String
     , propositionTitle : String
     , propositionSummary : String
     , propositionReductio : String
     , proofLink : String
-    , proofText : String
     , definitionTable : List Definition
     , argumentFormalization : List ArgumentEntry
     }
@@ -36,18 +28,3 @@ type alias Definition =
     { definiendum : String
     , definiens : String
     }
-
-
-type alias ArgumentStructure =
-    { notationP1 : String
-    , notationP2 : String
-    , notationP3 : String
-    , notationP4 : String
-    , notationP5 : String
-    , notationP6 : String
-    , notationP7 : String
-    , notationP8 : String
-    , notationP9 : String
-    , notationP10 : String
-    , notationC : String
-    }

frontend/src/Pages/Arguments.elm

@@ -3,55 +3,55 @@ module Pages.Arguments exposing (Model, Msg, page)
 import Config.Colour as T exposing (..)
 import Config.Format as O exposing (..)
 import Config.Identity as I exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Medicine.ApoBCVD exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.AnabolicKeto exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.AntagonisticPleiotropy exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.CarbsObesity exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.DietaryCholesterol exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.FructoseNAFLD exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthPromotingFoods exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthSeeker exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyChocolate exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyDairy exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyFattyFish exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyFibre exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyFood exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthyPlantFoods exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthySeedOils exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.HealthySoy exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.Malondialdehyde exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.Omega3Omega6Ratio exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.PlantBasedCVDReversal exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.PolyphenolReductio exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.SodiumCVD exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.TMAOCausality exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthyCoconutOil exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthyProcessedMeat exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthyRedMeat exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Nutrition.UnhealthySaturatedFat exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.Abortion exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.Agnosticism exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AgriculturalPredation exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AnimalRights exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AntiRewilding exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.AntiVandalism exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.ColonizingNature exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.CropDeaths exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.DairyCowRape exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.EfilismPatrolSquad exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.EthicalSlurs exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.FineTuning exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.ImmortalityReductio exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.OddOrderPredators exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.Ostroveganism exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.PollinationReductio exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.ScratcherPioneers exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.TransPeople exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Philosophy.VeganSocietyReductio exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Politics.BoobyTrapPagers exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Science.EpidemiologyCausality exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Science.FlatEarthDebunk exposing (..)
-import Debate.Arguments.Science.TruncatedMeta exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.Abortion exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.Agnosticism exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.AgriculturalPredation exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.AnabolicKeto exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.AnimalRights exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.AntagonisticPleiotropy exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.AntiRewilding exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.AntiVandalism exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.ApoBCVD exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.BoobyTrapPagers exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.CarbsObesity exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.ColonizingNature exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.CropDeaths exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.DairyCowRape exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.DietaryCholesterol exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.EfilismPatrolSquad exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.EpidemiologyCausality exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.EthicalSlurs exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.FineTuning exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.FlatEarthDebunk exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.FructoseNAFLD exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthPromotingFoods exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthSeeker exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthyChocolate exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthyDairy exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthyFattyFish exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthyFibre exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthyFood exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthyPlantFoods exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthySeedOils exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.HealthySoy exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.ImmortalityReductio exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.Malondialdehyde exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.OddOrderPredators exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.Omega3Omega6Ratio exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.Ostroveganism exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.PlantBasedCVDReversal exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.PollinationReductio exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.PolyphenolReductio exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.ScratcherPioneers exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.SodiumCVD exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.TMAOCausality exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.TransPeople exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.TruncatedMeta exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.UnhealthyCoconutOil exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.UnhealthyProcessedMeat exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.UnhealthyRedMeat exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.UnhealthySaturatedFat exposing (..)
+import Debate.Arguments.VeganSocietyReductio exposing (..)
 import Debate.Helpers exposing (..)
 import Effect exposing (Effect)
 import Element exposing (..)
@@ -145,80 +145,54 @@ debateList =
     column
         pageList
     <|
-        List.map
-            (\category ->
-                column [ spacing 20 ]
-                    [ el (nonHighlightedTitleFormat ++ [ centerX, F.letterSpacing 2, F.size 30]) (text category.categoryName)
-                    , column [] (List.map argumentMaker category.arguments)
-                    ]
-            )
-            [ { categoryName = "MEDICINE"
-              , arguments =
-                    [ argumentApoBCVD
-                    ]
-              }
-            , { categoryName = "NUTRITION"
-              , arguments =
-                    [ argumentAnabolicKeto
-                    , argumentAntagonisticPleiotropy
-                    , argumentCarbsObesity
-                    , argumentDietaryCholesterol
-                    , argumentFructoseNAFLD
-                    , argumentHealthPromotingFoods
-                    , argumentHealthSeeker
-                    , argumentHealthyChocolate
-                    , argumentHealthyDairy
-                    , argumentHealthyFattyFish
-                    , argumentHealthyFibre
-                    , argumentHealthyFood
-                    , argumentHealthyPlantFoods
-                    , argumentHealthySeedOils
-                    , argumentHealthySoy
-                    , argumentMalondialdehyde
-                    , argumentOmega3Omega6Ratio
-                    , argumentPlantBasedCVDReversal
-                    , argumentPolyphenolReductio
-                    , argumentSodiumCVD
-                    , argumentTMAOCausality
-                    , argumentUnhealthyCoconutOil
-                    , argumentUnhealthyProcessedMeat
-                    , argumentUnhealthyRedMeat
-                    , argumentUnhealthySaturatedFat
-                    ]
-              }
-            , { categoryName = "PHILOSOPHY"
-              , arguments =
-                    [ argumentAbortion
-                    , argumentAgnosticism
-                    , argumentAgriculturalPredation
-                    , argumentAnimalRights
-                    , argumentAntiRewilding
-                    , argumentAntiVandalism
-                    , argumentColonizingNature
-                    , argumentCropDeaths
-                    , argumentDairyCowRape
-                    , argumentEfilismPatrolSquad
-                    , argumentEthicalSlurs
-                    , argumentFineTuning
-                    , argumentImmortalityReductio
-                    , argumentOddOrderPredators
-                    , argumentOstroveganism
-                    , argumentPollinationReductio
-                    , argumentScratcherPioneers
-                    , argumentTransPeople
-                    , argumentVeganSocietyReductio
-                    ]
-              }
-            , { categoryName = "POLITICS"
-              , arguments =
-                    [ argumentBoobyTrapPagers
-                    ]
-              }
-            , { categoryName = "SCIENCE"
-              , arguments =
-                    [ argumentEpidemiologyCausality
-                    , argumentFlatEarthDebunk
-                    , argumentTruncatedMeta
-                    ]
-              }
+        List.map argumentMaker
+            [ argumentApoBCVD
+            , argumentAnabolicKeto
+            , argumentAntagonisticPleiotropy
+            , argumentCarbsObesity
+            , argumentDietaryCholesterol
+            , argumentFructoseNAFLD
+            , argumentHealthPromotingFoods
+            , argumentHealthSeeker
+            , argumentHealthyChocolate
+            , argumentHealthyDairy
+            , argumentHealthyFattyFish
+            , argumentHealthyFibre
+            , argumentHealthyFood
+            , argumentHealthyPlantFoods
+            , argumentHealthySeedOils
+            , argumentHealthySoy
+            , argumentMalondialdehyde
+            , argumentOmega3Omega6Ratio
+            , argumentPlantBasedCVDReversal
+            , argumentPolyphenolReductio
+            , argumentSodiumCVD
+            , argumentTMAOCausality
+            , argumentUnhealthyCoconutOil
+            , argumentUnhealthyProcessedMeat
+            , argumentUnhealthyRedMeat
+            , argumentUnhealthySaturatedFat
+            , argumentAbortion
+            , argumentAgnosticism
+            , argumentAgriculturalPredation
+            , argumentAnimalRights
+            , argumentAntiRewilding
+            , argumentAntiVandalism
+            , argumentColonizingNature
+            , argumentCropDeaths
+            , argumentDairyCowRape
+            , argumentEfilismPatrolSquad
+            , argumentEthicalSlurs
+            , argumentFineTuning
+            , argumentImmortalityReductio
+            , argumentOddOrderPredators
+            , argumentOstroveganism
+            , argumentPollinationReductio
+            , argumentScratcherPioneers
+            , argumentTransPeople
+            , argumentVeganSocietyReductio
+            , argumentBoobyTrapPagers
+            , argumentEpidemiologyCausality
+            , argumentFlatEarthDebunk
+            , argumentTruncatedMeta
             ]