astudyofman

[astudyofman]

thescienceofdeduction.co.uk - 2

Written in the characteristic style of BBC’s Sherlock, the page presents a few limited texts which detail the art of deduction. Well, with the in-universe removal of some articles, and the redirections to Watson’s writings for most others, there remain only two writings from which we may obtain an idea of deduction.

This is the second of two writings on this website, which explores a case entitled "The Green Ladder".

With this case, we can examine Sherlock’s use of the process outlined in the previous post. Below is my attempt at fitting a summary into his three steps.

Observation

He begins with a summary of the known events: the deaths, the circumstances around the deaths, and the people involved in the situation. A possible motive is revealed with the inheritance rules regarding the house’s ownership.

With a visit to the house in question, the crime scene is examined. The possibilities are narrowed down by the presence/absence of certain features.

The meeting with Keith must have proved very informative, with his status as the murderer being absolute afterwards. Without any details concerning it, however, we do not know how he came to this conclusion.

The meeting with Jane provides him with knowledge of the deceased’s patterns, particularly his belief in superstition and previous experience with alcohol. He also notices alcohol inside of the house, which is unusual for a light drinker.

The presence of green paint in the gravel, the positioning, and the testament of the gardener as to the couple’s lack of an item with such a description are noted upon a second look at the path. 

Deduction/Elimination Notes

We see the importance of keeping one’s mind free of biases here. Before meeting the suspected murderer, Sherlock makes a guess that the death was accidental, which is proven definitely wrong after his meeting.

A certain degree of knowledge is necessary in order to perform deductions. The connection between throwing salt over one’s shoulder and luck would not have been made without prior knowledge of the topic. Knowing a ladder had left the patches on the ground would require experience with the indentation left by ladders.

It appears that it is the unordinary which appears most useful to deduction. The presence of green paint, the practices of Jane and her husband, the presence of alcohol were the clues which lead to Keith’s incrimination.

We begin with our victim, Jack. According to those closest to him, he had no desire to kill himself. With the family having a gardener, we can assume they are sufficiently wealthy, so money was not an issue. Despite this, he has ended up dead in a lake, with a high amount of alcohol in his bloodstream. There was no sign of a struggle, so Jack must have walked into the lake on his own accord.

An accident then? A meeting with his brother says otherwise.

He begins with the Keith’s desire to obtain the house. In order for him to obtain it, his brother had to die. But his brother was not injured in any way. Knowing these, we can assume that he had influenced him in some way to his death. The bottle of alcohol suggests he got him inebriated, but how would he compel him to walk into a lake?

An examination of the scene reveals the unusual placement of a green ladder upon the path at some point. Since the family did not own such a ladder, it must have been brought there by someone else. We can assume that this was Keith, acting upon his knowledge of superstitions.

With the bottle of alcohol sent as a “present”, we can assume that Keith had sent him the bottle of alcohol in order to get him drunk. Jack goes on a walk, and comes across the ladder in his path. He goes around, and ends up walking into the lake due to the gravel.

Final Notes

While appearing simpler than the usual cases written about Sherlock, it remains as the only one in this universe which is written by the consulting detective himself. As such, what is written here represents the details which were deemed most important to him and the steps which he uses. While other cases most probably require a repetition of observation or deduction, the simplicity here makes it perfect for the process outlined in the previous post.

[astudyofman]

thescienceofdeduction.co.uk - 1

Written in the tactless style characteristic of BBC’s Sherlock, the page presents a few texts which detail the art of deduction. Well, with the in-universe removal of some articles, and the redirections to Watson's writings for most others, there remain only two writings from which we may obtain an idea of deduction. 

This is the first of two writings on this website, which explores the site’s Home Page.

While it is somewhat lacking in its explanation of the methods, with no specifics mentioned whatsoever, the home page still presents a general framework of the process. The three steps are listed below:

“I observe everything.”

The process begins with observation, and only observation. No conjectures are made at this time, nor until all the information has been gathered.

The formation of a theory before such an endeavor may bias one’s thought processes towards a particular outcome, and are therefore detrimental to performing a purely objective interpretation.

All of the observations one makes must be explained by the truth, and therefore all of the relevant data must be collected from the subject matter in order to ensure that the final theory is not contradicted by anything.

“From what I observe, I deduce everything.”

All possible deductions are made from one’s observations, no matter how improbable it may be. While the impossible may be ruled out, as long as it is truly impossible, the improbable must be considered as a possibility until such a time as it can be disproven.

Deductions can only be made if there is sufficient evidence to back it up. If there is no observation which corresponds with a particular hypothesis, then it is most probably an invalid line of reasoning. Evidence must be present in order to support one’s answer

“When I’ve eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how mad it might seem, must be the truth.”

Once one has narrowed their hypotheses down to those which are possible in this universe and supported by their observations, only then can those conclusions be considered “truth”

[astudyofman]

A Study of Man

Before I begin, I wish to make a few details clear

I claim no formal training in this field

I claim no ability to perform deductions at this point in time

My writings here are simply my interpretation of various sources related to deduction, a collection of my notes on the subject as I create them

I will focus primarily on the cases written by Doyle, but notes on other works will be written as well