Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
Yes, you can.But Sherlock uses not only the deductive method, but also the inductive one. It is a mistake to think that Sherlock Holmes sees small things and combines them into something big, from which he draws general conclusions. Watson was doing it, so he couldn't be a Holmes-level detective. I'll write a lot of letters and analyze them thoroughly.
Deduction is a method of thinking in which a particular proposition is logically deduced from the general one.
Induction is a process of logical inference based on the transition from a particular position to a general one.
An example of inductive inference looks like this:
Socrates is mortal
Socrates-the man
All people are mortal
At first, it seems that Sherlock Holmes does just that: notices the smallest details and draws conclusions based on them. Based on this, it is obvious that the process follows the principle from particular to general: it builds up the details in a logical chain and selects the most possible of the resulting assumptions. Based on these facts, it can even be concluded that A. K. Doyle made an incorrect statement about his own character and Holmes uses the induction method.
However, it is necessary to analyze the deductive method:
An example of deductive inference looks like this:
All people are mortal
Socrates-the man
Socrates is mortal
Its deduction is based on a huge knowledge base from various sciences, which combine to produce such an effect. And the work in which he collects small parts and combines them into one (the inductive part) is only collecting information for a more accurate comparison with the history-base (“…all atrocities have a great family resemblance…”). Thus, it goes from general categories (for example, crime-murder-man-rich, etc.) and eventually comes to a solution. His method even bears some resemblance to abduction
An example of abductive inference looks like this:
It is known that Socrates is mortal and that people are mortal, so we can ASSUME that Socrates is a human being.
Dr. Watson, trying to imitate his friend, uses precisely the methods of induction. He looks for the smallest details and tries to put them together, not realizing that his conclusions may be inaccurate or even erroneous. After all, an expensive watch does not indicate a person's position in society, he could have stolen it. Just for Holmes, an expensive watch will mean that either this is a rich man, or this is a first-class thief, or a tramp who found it.
Thus, Holmes uses the method of deduction on a huge knowledge base, but does not draw quick conclusions. Therefore, to be like him, you need to develop a lot in different areas, learn to combine this knowledge, do not give up the inductive basis – to see the little things – and be able to distinguish these little things from something common for a particular conclusion.
It is worth saying that Sherlock is not perfect, for example, he is not in the course, that if a dog is smeared with phosphorus, it will die a little, also that snakes can climb up ropes. And of course, that he forgets all sorts of little things, such as the fact that the moon revolves around the earth, etc.
You can't become Sherlock, but you can get closer by deductive abilities. Interest+diligence+textbook on criminalistics, court. medicine, criminal psychology = high-quality detective
Yes, it is possible!
When studying any material, try to get really interested in it, delving into all the subtleties of the subject being studied. To do this, find ways to arouse curiosity about the subject under study, which will push you to study it in depth.
Deepen your existing knowledge in various fields. Studying these or other subjects superficially, it is impossible to train your brain to deep analysis. Therefore, try to understand the very basics of the materials you are studying.
Expand your horizons. It is impossible to develop thinking skills with good knowledge in only one area. It is important to draw on knowledge from a wide variety of fields — science, culture, music, art, and many others. Any source of knowledge — reference books and encyclopedias, educational materials, general education books-will help you do this.
Flexibility of thinking is an important condition for the development of deduction. No matter how difficult it may be at first, try to find ways to solve problems other than the usual ones. By being able to view the subject (situation, event, words) from different angles, you can learn how to find the best solutions for your tasks.
Try to take a critical approach even to familiar situations and learn to find the best way out on your own, without relying on others.
Combine 2 methods of thinking — deduction and induction (inference from the particular to the general, the opposite of deduction).
In this case, quite. It is enough to take a good textbook on criminology, open a workshop on criminology in parallel, and if it is really interesting, then in two weeks you will begin to draw conclusions that Sherlock did not dream of. But all this should be done sincerely and with interest. Otherwise, it won't work.