sherlock deduction

  • Sherlock: Can I borrow a pen?
  • Anderson: I don't know, can you?
  • Sherlock: Yes, and I might add that colloquial irregularities occur frequently in any language, and since you and the rest of our present company perfectly understood my intended meaning, being particular about the distinction between 'can' and 'may' is purely pedantic and arguably pretensious.

That one time Holmes stared at Watson’s face and eyes from across the room then gave a 395 word description of what Watson’s exact thoughts were in that moment based on the sparkling of his eyes and the quivering of his lips and interrupted when he noticed Watson touching his old wound and thinking about the senseless horrors of war

A worldbuilding thing people often overlook is the way that cultures are contradictory without anyone really noticing or acknowledging it. Like “in Xland funerals involve covering the corpse with gold leaf and then making a dozen marble statues of the deceased” except, you know, those are only some funerals. Or “In the US in the fifties married women didn’t work outside the home” except that didn’t apply to poor women and plus actually quite a few middle class married women–with kids even–had full time jobs (like my grandmother, who was a social worker in the 50s and actually all the way up to her retirement).

The Sherlock Holmes style of deduction–no native speaker of English would make this particular mispelling! No member of this one religion would ever have/say/do this forbidden thing, therefore Person B must not have done it! Everyone in Society Z was married, so stories about an unmarried adult must be entirely fiction, or they must just not have mentioned a spouse for some reason” all these things assume that cultures are logically consistent in a particular, straightforward way that, frankly, they pretty much never are. Note, I’m not saying you can’t draw any conclusions at all from data about cultures, just, things aren’t hard and fast, certainly not simple, and people generally just don’t see the contradictions or put them in a special “but that’s different” category.

8

Poor reactions to Sherlock’s writings

And one more:

Eye Accessing Cues

The EAC model is very useful in the world that is lie-detection. EAC stands for Eye Accessing Cues, this is when one can see what someone thinks about, just by looking at their eyes.

This is the model:

  • When someone looks upwards to the left they remember an image, however, up to the right they construct an image.
  • If they look in a horizontal line to the left, they remember a sound, if they do this but the right they construct a sound.
  • Down to the left, they have an internal dialogue and down to the right, they experience a kinesthetic feeling (can also be smell and taste).

Something many seem to believe is that this is a very safe method, it is not extremely reliable. It requires some control questions.


Control questions are any questions that are like these:

  • Did your breakfast look tasty this morning? (To remember an image - up and to the left)
  • How do you think it would sound if your favourite band would play at a concert near you? (Constructing a sound - horizontally to the right)
  • How would you feel if you happened to hurt your best friend? (Emotion - downwards to the right)
  • How would you articulate a speech at your best friend’s wedding? (Inner dialogue - Down to the left)

When you ask the control questions it should be in an atmosphere that’s calm and comfortable, otherwise, the person will probably stare into your eyes or just look away. Don’t tell them that you’re going to ask them control question. Try this model and see that it’s fun.

This does not apply to every person, but if you ask the control questions and observe the eyes, you know if they do follow it. One thing to add is that left-dominant people seem to do the opposite of what I’ve explained.


Lying

Now if you want to see if someone is lying with this method make sure they follow this model. If they construct an image or sound when they should remember an image or sound, then this could point to a lie. If they say something like “It felt so horrible” but they look down to the left for an internal dialogue, they could be lying. But you should always try and find out more before accusing someone of lying.

And with that, I’ll see you my irregulars.

It was my responsibility to do this, therefore I am not sorry.

The absolute basics.

Let’s talk about the absolute basics in deduction. Seems like there’s a lot of people that misunderstand them, even other deductionists. This post is made to correct some of these misunderstandings.

What do we deductionists do? We gather information and make conclusions about that information. The premise is simple. Is it simple to get to the same level as Sherlock? No. Do I know of someone that is on the same level as Sherlock? No, and I know quite a few deductionists. But here’s the big reason why I don’t know of anyone at the same level as Sherlock, it’s not that Sherlock is fictional, it’s because of perfect situations that Sherlock is in. These happen, but not as often as Sherlock finds himself in them.

The way with OCC:

First of all, you should try and remember OCC. This the order in which you as a deductionist should operate.

Observation – Here you observe the place or person you are deducing. There are things to look for if you have the knowledge, some says you should observe everything, and sure, you should do that in a perfect world but you won’t be able to use everything you observe so that will only waste your time when you get into higher ranks of deduction. And if you want to know what to observe than all you need to do is practice.

Conclusion – The second step is to come to a conclusion from what you have observed. This is the deduction, we will talk more about this later on in this text. This will require both logic and knowledge. If you lack in one of these then you’ll need to train that.

Confirmation – Now this is something most deductionist don’t do because they are scared of failing. If you don’t confirm if you are right you’ll hinder your own progress extremely. If you can confirm, always try to.


The parts

Now, most break down deduction into two parts, logic and knowledge. I think that the knowledge part needs to be split into two parts. Absolute knowledge and statistical knowledge. This is important, I’ll try and explain why but first you need to know about the three kinds of deduction.


Deduction –

This reasoning is used when you have one or more statements that you combine to reach a logical conclusion.

The reasoning is that if the statements are true and clear the conclusion must be true.

An example of deductive reasoning:

Statements:

  1. Pink is not a natural hair colour.
  2. Emily has pink hair.

Conclusion:

  • Someone/something has dyed Emily’s hair pink.


This is deduction in which you use absolute knowledge to make a deduction. And if you truly use absolute knowledge then the conclusion will be correct.


Induction –

In inductive reasoning, you come to a conclusion that’s probable. The statements are viewed as strong evidence for your conclusion.

An example of inductive reasoning:

Statements:

  1. There are marbles in this bag.
  2. All 8 out of 10 marbles I have seen from this bag are black.

Conclusion:

  • All marbles from this bag are black.

This doesn’t tell you if the conclusion is true or not but thanks to the strong evidence of the statements you’re presented with, it’s probable that the conclusion is true. This is statistical knowledge and will be true most of the time.


Abduction –

In abductive reasoning, you have the statements and from that, you make an educated guess about what the conclusion might be. This reasoning is looking for the best explanation.

An example of abductive reasoning:

Statements:

  1. The grass is wet.
  2. The grass is usually dry.


Conclusion:

  • It has rained.

This is something we deductionists often do. We always look for the best explanation based on the evidence we are provided. This, if done correctly, will also most often be true. This will often be your own conducted statistical knowledge.


The reason why “knowledge” should be split into “absolute knowledge” and “statistical knowledge” is that if you have the logic you’ll never be wrong with absolute knowledge, but with statistical knowledge, you can still be wrong. Some tell you that logic is more important than knowledge and vice versa. This couldn’t be more wrong. Logic and knowledge are equally important. Those who don’t agree probably don’t know that much about the category they are dismissing. Logic and knowledge should work together alongside each other.

But if you want the “WOW effect” one of these triumphs over the other. If you do a deduction via logic people can see your train of thought quite easily, especially if you explain it. If you do deduction via knowledge then people won’t be able to follow your train of thought without that specific knowledge. And more people have a good logical mind than specific knowledge about everything. Something magicians have as a catchphrase nowadays are “People aren’t stupid” and that is true. If you, the reader of this thinks that most people are stupid then you need to come out of that bubble of yours.


Some other things.

So can you yourself measure how good you are at deduction? No, not really. You’ll always be biased towards yourself. So if you like yourself, you’ll probably think that you are better at deduction than you really are. If you think the worst of yourself then you’ll probably think you are worse than you really are. Then we have the “Dunning–Kruger effect”, most of you will probably, in the beginning, think that you are better at deduction than you really are, because of the Dunning-Kruger effect. It predicts that beginners rate themselves to be better than they really are while experts rate themselves to be worse than they really are. So no you can’t measure your skill level yourself.

This point I’ll make now is kind of connected to the previous one. Don’t assume you are right. That would be really stupid. If you assume you are right, you’ll fall for confirmation bias. This is when you look for things that would prove what you believe to be true, and miss things that disprove your theory. One more reason this is bad, I know of deductionists that don’t want to accept that they’re wrong, even if it’s confirmed. They think the one that tells them they’re wrong are lying. Extremely bad.

The pattern.

Your knowledge about deduction will improve. In the beginning, before you start deduction you’ll probably not know about it at all, you’ll have an unconscious ignorance towards it. When you start reading about it, you’ll probably understand that you don’t know much about it. So you’ll have a conscious ignorance towards it. After trying it out and really learning you’ll start noticing that you can deduce some things, you’ll have and conscious knowledge towards deduction. When you’ve become an expert to master you’ll make deductions without thinking that much, you’ll have an unconscious knowledge about deduction.


Pattern:

  1. Unconscious ignorance
  2. Conscious ignorance
  3. Conscious knowledge
  4. Unconscious knowledge

So, how do you get better in deduction? Practice, it might sound cliché but it’s true. But however, you can shorten the time quite much, if you confirm your deductions. The second C in OCC is extremely important. If you don’t know what you are doing wrong then you can’t improve. You won’t get better just from reading this. So go out there and make deductions and most importantly confirm your deductions.

If you want me to write a post about confirming your deductions about people without the fear to fail (because if you fail they won’t know that you’ve failed) then write to me about that. A lot of people seem to be afraid of saying their deductions out loud.

And with that, I’ll see you my irregulars.

The Eye Contact Triangles

Something that isn’t widely talked about on the internet is something I call “the eye contact triangles”. These triangles are a great thing to know about when you want to understand what kind of relationship one person has to an another. I honestly don’t know why this isn’t a more popular topic for the people of the Internet, it’s an easy and quick way to see the relationship status.

There are three types of triangles that the eyes follow when we communicate with others.

  • The upper goes from the top of the eyes to the forehead and are for those who view your relationship as strictly professional or those who feel they have power over you. Some of those who feel they are just an acquaintance with you will use this triangle too. So those who look at that triangle are looking at the “power/acquaintance triangle”.
  • Next triangle involves the eyes and the mouth, this is the “friend triangle”. This is of course used among friends, you can with this, see if a person has a friendship relationship to the other but the other party has an acquaintance–relationship with the first party. That would mean that the other party does not appreciate the first.
  • The third triangle goes from the eyes to the neck. It is the triangle of flirting so it’s simply called the “flirt triangle”. With this, you can see when someone is in a relationship, or when someone wants to have a relationship.


The context in this is incredibly important, someone who turns their head slightly and look intensively at your lips, suggest more that they do not hear what you are saying and have to resort to visual cues. They try and read your lips. There are a lot of examples in which these triangles are flawed if the context isn’t considered. So always think of what other signs tell you.

Try and learn this! Hope it helps!

And with that, I’ll see you my irregulars.