#Sherlockian Deduction | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

studies-in-the-art-of-deduction · 24 days

Text

Deduction Tips #16

The size of a bag is indicative of how much a person needs to carry, and usually we prefer to carry less things. When you see someone with a bag (be it a backpack, a purse, or anything else) think about why this person needs a bigger one rather than a smaller one, and what that says about the contents of the bag and the situation of the person carrying it

43 notes · View notes

amateur-deductions · 1 month

Note

When it comes to the observation weeks in the training program. Could you elaborate on why we shouldn’t deduce then? Is it only about the time when we are doing the exercises?

Hello! great question, i gotta say i didn't write that program, but i did follow it, so i can only give you an answer based on my experience with it and with deduction as a whole. Unfortunately L isn't available to give you the original reason, but if i get in contact with them i'll make a post with their answer.

So, there's this quote from Sherlock which sums up the reasoning behind this very clearly:

"It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts."

During this stage of the program it is assumed you're coming into deduction as a complete beginner, and therefore that you haven't honed your observation skills yet. This means you'll inevitably be at a point where if you try to deduce you'll be doing so while missing a large amount of information, and fall into the trap of not knowing you're missing information and trying to work with what you have, which leads to often taking big leaps in reasoning to reach conclusions, because you don't have enough data to work with.

This is also why when i teach people i make sure they're at an acceptable level in their observation skills before i move onto other stuff. Later on in the process you learn how to make the most out of a situation where you have little to no information to deduce from. But that's a bit too complicated for a beginner, so it's important that they don't try to deduce until they have a solid grasp on what information they can gather

Aditionally, the training program, as incomplete as it may be, attempts to separate the process of learning deduction into manageable chunks. That program was written during a time where the community was much bigger and everyone attempting to find some way of learning this skill. Everyone was coming up with solutions to their problems and sharing them in the community, and that program is an attempt to solve the overwhelming feeling that comes with trying to learn a massive skill with multiple possible points of entry. It segments it into manageable, organized chunks for people to have a neat way of getting started with deduction, and one of those chunks is just observation, since it's complex enough of a base skill to have its own section

13 notes · View notes

chemlock · 2 months

Text

Algae and Forensics

If you watch a lot of crime shows, you may have seen algae being used to help solve a crime. In Dexter, the algae on the victims was used to determine the port they came from, which led them to Dexter. Or Hannibal, where the algae led the FBI to Miriam Lass. A lot of crime shows play forensics up, but algae actually can be an important tool for helping solve a crime.

The presence of algae, or lack thereof, can tell us several things. Is there algae present in the closed organs of the decedent? If so, that tells you they were drowned or whether or not they were taken to a second location. What kind of algae? This can help us determine fairly accurately where the victim was drowned. This doesn't include bathwater or water with too few diatoms, such as ice water.

But how? Let's look into that.

First off, I will be using the term "Diatoms." If you are unaware, diatoms are a type of photosynthesising algae, so I will be using the terms interchangeably.

There are over 15,000 species of algae living in brackish, fresh water, and sea water. Ponds, lakes, rivers, oceans, and coastal areas all have different diatom communities, and using that we can identify where the victim might have been killed.

When you drown, liquid is aspirated into the lungs and enters the bloodstream through alveoli. This lets particles such as sediments, microorganisms, or pollen to be carried to organs and deposited in capillaries. This means that diatoms can be found in the organs of a drown victim.

So, if diatoms are found in distant organs or closed systems and are of a great abundance, the cause of death is most likely due to ante-mortem drowning. This lets us know that the victim was drowned and was not just dumped posthumously.

Thanks to diatoms acid resistant sillica shell, they can easily be separated from tissue using acid-digestive extractions, and they are detectable in burned or putrified corpses. This means that drowning as a cause of death could be determined in a burnt victim that was taken to a second location.

Algae is also being researched for its use as a time of death indicator. A study was conducted by forensic scientists, who found the diversity of algae on piglet bodies in water tended to decrease over time with a peak in diatoms recorded after 1-8 days of decomposition. This kind of work remains largely experimental, but it has the potential to be used for establishing a timeline since death (or submersion) in water.

Algae can be useful for linking criminals to their crime scenes, as diatoms can transfer onto clothing or footwear. Comparing microflora with the diatoms found could also give you a general area or type of water they were drowned in, as a swamp would have different algae than say, the ocean.

This evidence isn't damning in and of itself, but all evidence at a crime scene is valuable for solving the crime, and as such, algae can be an important part of forensics.

Thanks for reading! Have a good day and a cup of tea :)

62 notes · View notes

pingo1387 · 1 year

Text

I’d love it if there was one detective in detective conan who believed in the supernatural and seriously considered stuff like ghosts and vampires during weird cases

#they have different personalities sure but nearly every legitimate detective in the series believes the same things #same sherlockian deductions same refusal to believe any kind of magic #same smirk when they solve a case #detective conan

10 notes · View notes

asprngdeductionist · 6 months

Text

Yes, still am pretty occupied with my personal stuff, but I’ll make szre you get some content on the weekend. Until then, here is my main blog

Happy deducing!

#deduction #body language #observation #the mentalist #sherlockian

1 note · View note

ahappydnp · 7 months

Note

hey! :) do we know or have an idea of when dan and phil came out to each other?

sherlockian deductive reasoning when they started tongue kissing each other girl idk

#anon ask #(this is a joke)

980 notes · View notes

popatochisssp · 5 months

Note

i'm not sure if you already explained it, but how does pitch's 'soul-sense' work? how is he able to tell what reader is holding in sweet treats, where they were, etc?? he's so COOL i'm so curious

Pitch (Horrorswapfell Sans) is a case of using some Sherlockian observation nonsense in conjunction with his available senses to make people think he has super-powers and it’s very intentional on his part.

A monster’s soul-sense is just an extrasensory awareness of living beings with souls. Not too much can be gleaned from it, mostly the feeling that someone’s nearby and approximately in what direction—and when right up close, a vague subconscious sense of their broad emotional state.

Some monsters have a greater awareness than others and can get a sense of someone or get a feel for their current state from further away. It varies by monster, about the same as, say, any given human’s ability to do a cartwheel: some kinda suck at it, some can do it easily, some can kinda half-do it and it’s not proper form but it’s more or less what was asked for.

…And some people went to gymnastics training and can do four or five perfect ones consecutively and pull out the “What, like it’s hard?” when you stare at them in surprise, and that’s Pitch’s soul-sense.

In the Sweet Treats chapter, Pitch is especially attuned to the feel of his dear partner and was keeping a background awareness of them as they moved away, then up—into the attic—and stayed there awhile.

The only thing up there is boxes of junk, so he assumes they must be cleaning or otherwise going through things. When they stop and abruptly make a bee-line straight for him, with a vibe of general excitement and agitation, he makes the deduction that they found something they wanted to show him, or for him to fix, and ended up being right on both counts.

The fact that he’s able to do these things and so often be correct is terrible for his ego…which is to say, it’s great for his ego, but his ego is huge and healthy and well-fed and needs no further assistance.

#anonymous #headcanons #sweet treats #horrorswapfell #hsf!sans

52 notes · View notes

waitedforgarridebs · 6 months

Text

I just explained some meta-stuff regarding S4 and Eurus to a non-Sherlockian friend @yayen-chan, and when we got to the window deduction scene and Faith's note, she said:

... there's also about the window scene. LONDON BARELY GETS SUN - how in the world would that paper be exposed to sun unless the place where it came from is somewhere sunny [...] therefore the conclusion > the paper wouldn't be able to get any sort of sun at any part of the freaking window in a country where the sun dont shine

The common sense of it all actually makes me cry.

I am going out on a limb... but adding Sherlock's "deduction" about how the paper was exposed to "a variety of cooking smells" and "lots of different spices"... was the paper maybe not originally found in England, like we were all lead to assume?

*coughs* Morocco *coughs* Karachi ...

#you're a mad genius I hope you know that Yen #'assume' makes an ass out of u and me again #i love this #Sherlock #Sherlock meta #TLD #reference

15 notes · View notes

inevitably-johnlocked · 1 year

Note

HELLO!! :)

I'm currently fixated on this dorky genius that has 12 phds with polydactyly, can you believe it! 6 working fingers on both hands!!....he's so babygirl omg AKASKSKHDJxD

Anyways- this current brainrot made me remember a lovely little ongoing Sherlock Au of the show the aforementioned genius of my affection is from- (it's gravity falls)

The au is called "Reichenbach Falls" 🫶 and I love it to bits (⁠人⁠ ⁠•͈⁠ᴗ⁠•͈⁠)♡ this ain't an ask but more so a little rec for anyone interested. I'd love to shed even more light onto this wonderful creation !! It deserves love with how beautifully it's written and thought out. AKDHSK THE MYSTERY TRIO (SHERLOCK, JOHN, IRENE) INSTEAD OF JUST THE MYSTERY TWINS-. It's surrounded by many mysteries just like GF but has its own Sherlockian flair to it, so what's not to love?? B^D

((Plus if anyone is/was a fan of the whole superwholock thing then boi do I have a fic for ya!!))

Ps. Sherlock and Irene are siblings in this and to top it off it is Johnlock

Hey Nonny!

Ah! I believe this is the series you're referencing? It's the only Gravity Falls AU fic I know of:

Reichenbach Falls by VeeTheRee (M, 536,133+ w., 101/303 Ch. || WiP || Gravity Falls / Multifandom AU || Alternate First Meeting, Gay Sherlock, Mutual Pining, Unilock, Summer Romance/Love, Fluff, Insecure Sherlock, Villain Mary, First Kiss, Slow Burn, Doctor Who, Supernatural, Canadian John, French Canadian Lestrade, Insecure Sherlock, Mystery, Domestic Fluff, Developing Relationship Summer Love, Light Angst, BAMF! John, Case Fic) – Two Canadians, two Brits studying in Canada, and an upkeeper walk into a Mystery Shack…. and live there. Summer holidays are here, and the step-siblings, Irene Adler and Sherlock Holmes, find themselves in a boring town called Reichenbach Falls, Oregon, USA. It isn’t as boring as it seems, however, once Sherlock stumbles upon a mystery journal, and the author is unknown. The journal contains ciphers, a strange colour wheel, and information about magical creatures that are said to be looming in the Northwestern forests. With mysteries to solve in hand, he and Irene set out to get to the roots of the town, and the abrupt disappearance of the author of the journal. But they’re not alone - John Watson, quite the handsome nephew of the Mystery Shack owner Greg Lestrade, is on their side to help out, plus mess with Sherlock’s feelings, in a good way. Shenanigans, romance, fun, danger, and deductions ensue. Oh, and there’s also occasional SuperWhoLock and two dorky Winchester brothers to spark up the action later on. Part 1 of the Reichenbach Falls series

-----

It hasn't been updated in awhile but it's a half a million words long, and I've heard NOTHING but good things about it. I'm happy that you brought it up so I can promote it again! <3

#steph replies #gravity falls au #johnlock fic recs #signal boost

12 notes · View notes

studies-in-the-art-of-deduction · 1 month

Note

Hi!!! How can deductions be used in day to day life, or like, usefully? And how have you made useful deductions? Sorry if that made little sense

Hi! I see you sent this question in the past two days, i'll gladly answer it, but in case you send any other questions in the future and i don't answer them as quickly i'll inform you that usually all the questions of the week are collected in my inbox and you'd get your answer on a Monday (this week i had some scheduling problems so i pushed it to Wednesday), so if you don't get as quick an answer next time just wait for Monday!

Now, regarding your question! There's many ways deduction can be used in daily life, sometimes it even depends on what you do for a living. For example i know psychologists and other healthcare profesionals have to rely on non verbal communication and information they gather from observation, along with what they're told, since patients can't be relied upon to be transparent and honest all the time, or even know what information is releant to share. In this case deduction can be massively useful.

On a more general note, it depends a lot on the type of relationships you have, i know people who use deduction to interact with their friends, it allows them to know when they're feeling upset or worried, and about what, and act accordingly, all without needing to do more than just glance at them. I know people who use deduction to navigate social situations because they're not good at interacting with people and having the extra information deduction provides helps. Personally i'm someone that introduces deduction into everything i do, from acquiring helpful knowledge when talking to superiors, to knowing what waiter is best to call over at my table cause they've gotten more hours of sleep.

I recommend you watch Sherlock, House M.D., The Mentalist, and all of these deduction heavy shows that sometimes showcase how these characters use their skills casually, it's really not much different than what you see there. If you want a blog that really goes into casual uses of dedduction i'd check out @froogboi 's blog, it's full of everyday life uses of deduction

22 notes · View notes

amateur-deductions · 1 month

Note

Greetings @amateur-deductions

What are your Go-to advice for for those who start becoming a deductionist and just finished learning body language?

Appreciate Your reply

Bless you all and have a good day.

Hello! Sorry for the delay, i've been on a hiatus since Christmas.

So if you're coming from having learned body language already you have a bit of a head start compared to people that are starting fresh, since you probably have already learned to be more observant, to be constantly aware of things like body movements and facial expressions, and to intepret these things and process them as you take them in. I would say this means you can put a bit less time into the observation practices beginners usually have to go through, and you can dedicate more time to practicing reasoning and logical thinking

I would also say you have the option to approach deduction using your body language background. Something you start to realize as you get better at deduction is that everyone has cultivated different skills they use to extract information, some people use raw logic reasoning, some use extensive psychology knowledge, and some use extensive knowledge in body language and facial expressions, and there's nothing wrong with any of these methods, they're simply what you could understand as different "specialties".

So i would advice that you don't try to learn deduction as a separate discipline than body language, but rather use your body language knowledge, coupled with anything you learn in the field of deduction, to enhance your conclusions

This does come with a disclaimer though. Make sure that you're not leaning into your body language knowledge so much that you're avoiding doing the exercises and learning the methods that are core to deduction simply because body language provides an easier path, since you're well versed in that already

12 notes · View notes

desperatelyseekingcannibals · 4 months

Video

youtube

My favourite part of The Church on Ruby Road wasn’t The Doctor’s amazing wardrobe, his wonderful dancing, the whimsy of a song and dance number, the sense of this being something really new, the hint at further mysteries without it being ridiculously overdone (this person is so important to the universe this entire season will be completely absorbed by it with little to no satisfying payoff).

No. It was around the ten minute mark when, after meeting the above police officer, The Doctor does more Sherlockian deductive reasoning in a couple of minutes than Sherlock did in the whole four seasons of BBC’s Sherlock. And I like to think that was a purposeful fuck you to Steve Moffat. And I’m here for that.

#doctor who #fifteenth doctor #the church on ruby road #bbc sherlock #moffat is a hack #russell t davies

3 notes · View notes

bakerstreetbabble · 3 years

Text

Granada TV Series Review: "The Greek Interpreter" (S02, E02)

"The Greek Interpreter," one of the adventures from The Memoirs of Sherlock Holmes, is of interest to Sherlock Holmes fans mainly due to its being our first glimpse of Mycroft, Sherlock's older brother. And Mycroft is certainly a fascinating character: described as "absolutely corpulent" by Watson, but with "the sharpness of expression which was so remarkable in that of his brother," Mycroft has, according to his younger brother, "better powers of observation than I." So the tale is notable for its expansion of the great detective's back story. Sadly, as the reader reaches the end of the story, it is profoundly disappointing compared to many of Holmes's other cases. The bad guys get away, and a man is dead. The Greek interpreter of the title survives, just barely.

Therefore, it's no wonder that the writers of the Granada adaptation felt the need to flesh out the plot considerably. As a result, the last ten minutes or so of the episode contain a plot original to the episode, that is frankly rather ridiculous. Sherlock, Watson and Mycroft go running (literally) after the villains, and confront them on a train. The whole thing becomes a "train adventure," complete with the violent death of one of the baddies, a smooth bit of pocket picking by Mycroft, and even a moment where Mycroft holds a pistol to the other bad guy's head. One gets the distinct impression that the writers knew the ending as Doyle wrote it was worthless, so they just took a sharp turn, and wrote the adventure they wanted to see the main characters have.

Still the episode is not completely worthless. Charles Gray does an admirable job as Mycroft. (My impression was that he was too old to play the role, but I see from a quick Wikipedia search that he was only 5 years older than Brett.) I don't know that Gray was quite as "stout" as Watson describes him in the story, and he doesn't seem nearly tall enough. However, considering the trend in many Holmes adaptations for a slim Mycroft (BBC Sherlock, Elementary, and Enola Holmes spring to mind), I think the casting was pretty good. And we are treated to a lovely scene at the Diogenes Club, wherein Sherlock and Mycroft trade deductions about a random guy in the street below, to Watson's very clear delight.

Speaking of Watson, I am always impressed by David Burke's Watson. I only wish that he had been able to continue the role after this first series. Edward Hardwicke was very good, too, but Burke was the best, in my opinion. Indeed, if I had to rank all the Watsons I've seen over the years, I believe David Burke would be at the top of my list. It is also important to remember that, at the time, Burke was a breath of fresh air for a role that had been largely defined by Nigel Bruce's comic portrayal of the character.

Overall, in "The Greek Interpreter," we are left with an episode that is enjoyable enough for its character development, but that inherits many of the defects of its source material, and tries to over-compensate with a new ending that borders on the ludicrous. So, not a complete waste of time, but not one of the better episodes I've seen thus far.

Postscript: The Nashville Scholars of the Three Pipe Problem, the Sherlockian group in which I participate here in Nashville, TN, just discussed this story a week ago at our monthly meeting. Many of the opinions I've shared above (about the original story and its adaptation by Granada) were voiced by other members of the group. Indeed, we had a lively discussion about the story. And a good time was had by all...

youtube

#jeremy brett #granada holmes #The Greek Interpreter #Youtube

4 notes · View notes

captainsupernoodle · 1 year

Text

love vimes being a little bits-and-bobs knowledge guy. he just picks things up. he can noodle his way through some latin. he has an encyclopedic knowledge of the city based on how it feels to walk on the street. just things he picks up through experience mostly. it walks a delightful line between regular guy and the sherlockian deduction trope - he's been around the block a few times and when he's happy he's observant and thoughtful, and that accumulates

#noodle reads discworld #discworlds

7 notes · View notes

mzannthropy · 5 months

Text

So, Enola Holmes. How do I solve a problem like Enola Holmes?

I have liked Sherlock Holmes stories for years (albeit not to the extent I like Agatha Christie, nor am I the type of expert on Sherlock as I am on Agatha Christie; when it comes to adaptations I've seen some and mostly enjoyed them, some more, like the Granada series, some less, like the BBC Sherlock). I am also a fan of Sam Claflin. When I heard there was going to be a film centred on a young Holmes sister, with Sam as Mycroft, I was, naturally excited. It sounded right up my street, even though I'm not the target demographic. A period drama with a young heroine? As a lover of L.M. Montgomery I'd like that by default. A mystery set in Victorian London? It had all the ingredients. I was not thrilled about it being about a younger sister of Sherlock, but it wasn't a major issue. And Sam was going to be in it!

Then I saw the trailer and felt like someone stabbed me with a knife.

I'm saying this to make it clear that I did not go into it with the intention of hating it. I never do, bc I'm not like that. I give everything a chance, even when everyone else is being negative. "I can't wait to hate on this show", that's not me. Sure, I didn't have to watch it--but I also I had to bc of Sam. So I did and somehow got through it, while fast forwarding parts of the film and yeah, I would have liked it, bc there was a lot about it to like, except that one crucial thing--Sam as Mycroft. Or a character named Mycroft, bc he has nothing whatsoever in common with Mycroft of Arthur Conan Doyle's stories. (Okay, neither have many adaptations, but at least they're not... like that.) Except for the working for the government, and I suspect they kept that bc it suited them, not out of any respect to the Sherlockian canon.

This Mycroft is a ridiculous cartoon villain, with a cartoon villain moustache, cartoon villain hairstyle and cartoon villain lines. Mycroft from the original books is smarter than Sherlock (Sherlock himself says so, read the beginning of Greek Interpreter if you don't believe me), he's just too lazy to actively solve crimes. He founded a club for antisocial men. He created his own position in the government, securing employment for the rest of his life. Enola!Mycroft is none of that. He possesses no skills of observation or deduction. He appears to be a conservative, old fashioned, sexist, all the bad things that the audience will hate him for. Enola, on the other hand, is smarter than both of her brothers. Bc of course she is. And people here ate it all up. So you can see why the film was so upsetting to me.

I like seeing Sam in different roles. I LIKE him playing villains. Heck, one of my most favourite performances of his is Oswald Mosley in Peaky Blinders, a real world fascist. In The Nightingale, he plays an absolute monster and that's one of his best films. I like to see him play three-dimensional, well rounded characters. I'm not interested in watching him in romcoms. You get my point. If Sam's character in Enola was the one she was after, like the culprit of the crime she was solving, I would have been fine with that. If he was, let's say, Moriarty, I would even have welcomed that. If Enola was a character in her own universe, not Sherlock pastiche, and Sam was, for example, her strict uncle, with the same characterisation as this Mycroft, I would have been okay with that. (He behaves more as an uncle than a brother in any case, these guys have no sibling dynamic. Source: I have siblings with a big age gap.) But even all that I could get through with gritted teeth, if if wasn't for another obstacle--Henry Cavill as Sherlock.

They really went all-in on Eye Candy Sherlock, with those pretty curls. Whereas Sam... well, you can see for yourselves what they did to him. The gross moustache, the idiot hairdo. Yet Sam has curls just as pretty as Henry's. (Funny thing is, that Sam and Henry are sort of similar looking, they can believably play brothers. But they did everything to make them look different.) So between peeps who loved Enola and the wokery of the film, and Henry's fans gushing over his cuteness, it was quite a hard place to be for me as a fan of Sam. It made me feel like a poor relation, something I have, let's say, a bit of a baggage with.

I understand that playing a cartoon villain was something Sam wanted to try his hand at, and I don't hold it against him. (Like, if I was an actress, I'd have liked to play a stepmother in Cinderella, I would get a kick out of that role.) But that doesn't mean I have to like the end result.

And now back to what I started with--how do I deal with all this, how do I reconcile my love for Sam Claflin with what he did to Mycroft, as also a fan of Sherlock Holmes?

The best explanation I can come up with is that, as the story is told from Enola's POV, she sees him as worse than he really is. Not that she's an unreliable narrator, or if she is, not on purpose. (Like you can do the same with e.g. Snape in Harry Potter.) He could have had good intentions with her, with regards to the boarding school. As for the scenes where she doesn't appear and he does, well, she cannot know what went on there anyway, so how do we know she's not making that up? I mean, him and Sherlock seemed to have got on well and Sherlock liked him, so he couldn't have been that horrible.

I was relieved to find out he wouldn't be in the second film (he was filming DJATS), I didn't watch it and never will. But now the third one has been announced and the old dread is creeping back. Another scheduling conflict would be too much luck, so all I can hope for is at least a tiny bit of character development. Please, gods of film and TV, please.

#enola holmes #sam claflin #mycroft holmes #samblogging #out of all the fucking sherlockian pastiche sam had to be in that... sigh #hard life of a fan #it is very much a fml for me sometimes #still i wouldn't trade sam for anyone #at least enola has 91% on rotten tomatoes so that's another film the 90s for sam!#mypost

4 notes · View notes

thedeductionpage · 1 year

Text

Denial

I’m a person who loves psychological deduction. I prefer working on a person’s psyche / personality rather than getting more physical, sherlockian deductions. If you happen to get your deductions confirmed, you’ll come across a few forks in the road, make a few mistakes, and that’s fine. Sometimes, though, you are completely correct and the problem lies in whoever you’re deducing, because they’re living in denial.

How will you be able to tell if you’re actually onto something or if you’ve made an error?

1.) self-awareness. Was that deduction really reasonable, or did you just want to feel better about yourself? Did you just want the drama, or were there pieces of evidence to support it? Check yourself.

2.) establish a baseline. Is it in the person’s behavior to be in denial about this? if yes, then…there you go!

3.) look for inconsistencies. Prod them a little, see how they react, emotionally.

4.) ask the right questions.

I’ve got two examples from two people i’ve deduced, one in denial, one I was incorrect about.

I deduced a girl in her teens who claimed I got everything correct, but one: that she cared about how people saw her and her looks. According to her, she didn’t. Of course, that was a lie.

Why? Here’s what I got (keep in mind that these were all confirmed)

- 13-16, female, stable economic status, not as comfortable as she liked.

- active online

- wants to be seen as funny, charming, someone intelligent, interesting, and with substance.

- strong personality, opinionated, rich inner world, yet introverted and shy.

- has older siblings that are perceived as either more attractive, intelligent, or both.

- complicated but alright relationship, closer to mother.

- lonely

- has trouble asserting herself.

- feels a lot of pressure to live up to her own and others’ expectations of her, academically, physically, behaviorally.

She claimed she didn’t care how she looked and what people thought of her and that I was wrong. I ended up being right, but we’ll get to that, later. Why did I stick to my guns?

- had on undetectable makeup, face covered with hair that was braided.

- fashion had a clear niche or message.

- psych profile: insecure, pressured, self-perception, trouble with assertion

—> Her psych profile, that she confirmed, all points to a certain pattern. What I knew about her was she was insecure, feeling pressured, wanted to seen as interesting, all that— but what’s the root cause of all this?

She draws a lot of her self-image from those around her.

Whether she wants to be pretty and smart enough or wants to prove she doesn’t care are not as important the fact that she feels she has something to prove to these people. There’s a difference between not caring and wanting to look like you don’t care. There’s a difference between thinking/being something, and wanting people to see you as that. Look for inconsistencies.

What about when I was wrong?

I deduced a girl and got:

- introverted

- young adult to teen female, around 17.

- artistic or creative, sketches or writes.

- very active online, expressive.

- very particular about self expression.

- outspoken

- insecure, specifically when it comes to the physical self.

- wants a sense of belonging, to be seen by the right people in the right ways.

- feels misunderstood.

- skeptic

- anxious

- closed off, emotionally distant and can be seen as cold or abrasive

- “I wouldn’t say you have a terrible reputation or relationship with people in your social circle, you may just not be involved enough.”

- your parents / family, I think may be an okay relationship? They’re not terrible, at the very least.

I got things wrong because of biases, honestly. The things she called out were reasonable.

introverted—> actually extroverted. I was led on by her activity online and the stereotypes that came with the “edgy-activist”, outspoken type.

relationship with parents—> i wanted to play safe and didn’t want to risk it, ironically, didn’t want to engage in stereotypes even if the answer was right there.

I also got her economic status slightly wrong, mainly because I got lazy/careless and didn’t want to offend her. I’ll admit, I didn’t have the balls and was biased.

Hindsight’s 20/20, learn from your mistakes.

As you can see, there’s a clear difference between someone who’s in denial and someone you’re wrong about. Remember, when you talk to those in denial, that you’re altering their perception of reality slightly. There will be feelings. So, how do you approach the problem?

Ask the right questions. I didn’t ask the first girl why she was lying, I asked questions that I knew she would answer a certain way, if my suspicions were true.

- you use fashion to express yourself? yes.

- you did your own hair? yes.

- “i normally do my hair”

Ask questions with answers you know they’ll answer a certain way if your deduction was correct. Look for reluctance or a highly emotional response. These all, + my previous deductions, pointed to me being correct. Stick to your guns. Make it make sense. Learn how to detect shit. I’m gonna be honest, I’m getting sick of writing this post so i’ll stop here. I hope you learned something from this. Bye.

#deduction #deductive reasoning #Sherlock #logical reasoning #deduce #psychology #observer #learning #sherlockbbc #bbc sherlock

17 notes · View notes