I reviewed your discussion at Introduction to Critical Rationalism
Overall, your posts look good to me. I think you’re making progress, not stuck. I think more practice at that kind of discussion would benefit you. Did you enjoy writing those posts?
If you have questions let me know. Or specific goals that you want criticism or suggestions for.
One area where I noticed room for improvement is (sub-)topic selection. But I doubt that’s what you should focus attention on right now.
One issue you might like to think about is whether omissions, incompleteness or something better being possible implies any errors. Just because there’s the possibility for improvement doesn’t necessarily obviously mean something is mistaken. There’s room for nuanced consideration there.
I don’t think you dropped the context there. Context dropping means failing to take into account some relevant piece of context that you are or ought to be aware of, e.g. something someone already said earlier in the discussion. I think claims along the lines of “I think, therefore I am” should be introduced into the discussion by someone who thinks they’re relevant, not treated as premises that everyone should already agree with and always take into account.
I think they’re all different. Bringing up truth, identity or certainty is different than not doing that.
What about abstract statements?