I like Nicky Case's interactive systems. It's a way of bringing practical considerations to discussions which are usually more moral, and usually "more heat than light".
It seems like it's useful for surfacing two kinds of disagreement: differences in the models people hold of the world, and differences in moral foundations about how to feel about that.
Models can be wrong, etc. but where disagreeing with someone's moral argument makes you 'bad', disagreeing with a practical argument is 'dumb'.
Models can be wrong, etc. but where disagreeing with someone's moral argument makes you 'bad', disagreeing with a practical argument is 'dumb'.