#logic and deduction

[starbylers]

M*levens will say Will’s love for Mike is ‘just a crush’ or that ‘he can/will get over it’ whereas El’s love for Mike is real and true and deep, too strong for her to possibly move on from…while in the same breath try and claim Will’s words/feelings in the van also belong to El. Make it make sense 🙂 they'll say Will's feelings = El's feelings to explain why the monologue is valid even though Will was the driving force behind it, but then turn around and say Will's feelings ≠ El's feelings which is why he'll move on but El can't, and why El’s love for him is deeper and why she‘s better for him. It's a total paradox.

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

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

[kindest-little-fella-in-town]

designed logico now i gotta design his boyfriend

[emblazons]

the fact that 1) people still believe text leaks from random “I can’t give away my sources” mfs on twitter and 2) upon receiving a context-free ‘leak,’ no one first considers that “oh a love interest” would likely just be a random WB focuses on trying to forget about his crush for two seconds (A La “Kiss?” Girl with Jonathan as he sees Nancy at the party in S2) is CRAZY

you could not pay me to be caught lacking that hard I’m sorry

[snozzlefrog]

I know we all love our good regular people but the little objecthead goblin inside of me still thinks of the Murdle characters like their icons

[ijustwantedtolookatonething]

Irragigo

This is them coded

[book-quotes-i-found]

“But you forget one thing: my right to religious freedom.”

“Religious freedom doesn’t give you permission to commit murder,” Logico replied.

“But have you considered— what’s that over there?”

Page 334 of Murdle volume 3 by G.T.Karber

[pandoratheprocrasticreator]

in amami's video in his lab, he specifically tells his future self to be careful regarding his identity as the ultimate survivor because "anyone who finds out who you are is gonna come for you."

the thing is, even if he survived this far, the only person who would know the implications of his talent would be shirogane, the mastermind. the english version of this line implies that she'd have to "find out" about his talent, meaning she wouldn't already know at the start of the game.

this doesn't make sense, as shirogane was a danganronpa super fan before starting v3. even if she wasn't involved in season 52 like some fans speculate, she would have watched the show or at least have been vaguely aware that amami survived season 52 as someone who paid attention to danganronpa news.

amami wasn't, like, all that smart with hiding what he knew, of course. he woke up in a school full of ultimates and was immediately like "i don't remember my talent but don't worry. i'm not suspicious :)))))" his survivor's perk TOLD him there was a mastermind in the school and said "here's some extra info but ONLY share it with someone you trust" and then my man walked into a room full of ppl he barely knows and is like "does anyone here know about this secret information that no one's supposed to know about except maybe the mastermind?" like i think even without the surveillance cameras shirogane could have probably figured it out.

in japanese, he says "キミの正体を知る者は、きっとキミを狙ってくるはずっす," which directly translates to "anyone who knows your true identity will surely come after you." which is. slightly different i think. this implies that shirogane possibly already knows amami's the ultimate survivor, which makes more sense given her involvement with danganronpa in general.

the fact that this warning was in a video that amami would have only found after 4 class trials makes me think shirogane probably wasn't supposed to target amami so early in the game. that makes sense narratively too. if team danganronpa and shirogane wanted a good story, they should have put focus on the ultimate survivor from season 52 as he figured out shirogane's identity. amami getting his survivor perks at all also point to this.

shirogane didn't want to get rid of amami immediately just because he had the potential to find her out. for drama, she should have kept him alive as far into the game as she could have, so he could face off against her at the end of the game. the reason amami warned himself about the mastermind in a video that would be found in chapter 5 was because after 4 trials, it would have been far enough into the killing game that it would start making narrative sense for shirogane to start targeting him.

anyway before i did research on the japanese translation of this scene, i thought that shirogane, like, had her memories of season 52 and at least specifically amami removed. to make it like a fairer fight between the ultimate survivor and the mastermind or smth. but alas nisa mistranslated yet another detail of the game. the japanese line makes things less convoluted. if someone else killed in chapter 1, shirogane would have just held out for several more chapters because her goal wasn't to win the game, but make it fun.

anyway this didn't matter to either amami OR shirogane in the end. amami was basically waving a neon sign around himself saying "IM THE ULTIMATE SURVIVOR." and somehow shirogane or whoever in team danganronpa came up with the first motive didn't think through the contingency plans. and somehow out of 16 people akamatsu was the only one to plan a murder. and somehow amami decided the best way to confront the mastermind, who he thought was making a bunch of dangerous monokumas, was to sneak alone and unarmed into their lair without any way to defend himself.

anyway if these two had thought through any of their decisions in chapter 1 amami might have made it to the end of the game to find his video and then have an epic showdown with shirogane like team danganronpa probably wanted them to. i just know that the moment shirogane beaned the season 52 poster boy in the head she knew she'd be spammed with viewer complaints. poor shirogane. between this and kiibo showing iruma's poop on live tv i don't think she minded when she got her own head smashed in at the end. team danganronpa would have murdered her the moment she stepped out of the school anyway.

[amateur-deductions]

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

[ijustsmackedmynewtattoo]

Deducing With Disorders Pt. 1

Dissociative Disorders: TW - Mentions/Descriptions of Dissociation

Credit to @sleuth2k7 for the idea

So quick disclaimer: I am not a certified psychologist, I am giving generalized advice for deducing with disorders that I have been diagnosed with based on my personal experience. Nothing is one-size-fits-all.

When I was 15 I was diagnosed with derealization/depersonalization disorder. DR/DP is one of three types of dissociative disorders spanning approximately 1%-2% of the population, and as with all dissociative disorders, involves repeated episodes of disconnection from one's sense of self and surroundings. With DR/DP specifically, I experience long episodes of what I can only describe as having a VR headset glued on where you can only watch what's happening to your character, and you just have this certainty nothing in this world is real, occasionally being removed from the driver's seat entirely and placed further back in the VR world by some part of your brain that belongs to you on every count except your own.

TLDR: Am I real? Are you? How to deduce when you aren't sure if you're real is the question.

Answer: I personally do reality checks to start, and I incorporate deduction into that. Am I real? Well does 2+2 still equal 4? Do those baggy pants plus that ill-fitting suit still mean that this teenager is wearing his dad's clothes? Probably. Let's find out.

So when we're reconnecting to ourselves and our surroundings, we look for things that verify our experience as truly our own. Make it a game. Certain deductions are worth certain points, it can help to have a friend to play with. A profession is worth 5, a relationship status is worth 10, etc. No friend? No problem. The classic grounding method of listing 5 things you see, 4 you hear, 3 you can touch, 2 you can smell, and 1 thing you can taste can be built upon to be a more mindful exercise that you don't just run right through.

When listing your sensory observations, use your list to then deduce things about the person. For example, I used to smoke, quit like 2 or 3 years ago, but my ex would always be able to know I had been smoking when I was within 20 feet of her. She could see the nicotine stains, the smudge of ash on my thumb from flicking the cigarette, the lump of a crumpled cigarette pack in my pocket, and not just the obvious pieces of information, she saw the cologne in my bag, and the look on the faces of my friends who would smoke with me before school. For sound she may have heard the dry smoker's cough, the crackling of a lit cigarette, the spritz of a bottle of cologne before I walked up to her, and the click of a lighter in my fidgeting hands. She would reach out and touch the grainy bits of ash on my shirt, and feel the tremors in my hand, and the movement of the pack in my pocket. Obviously, she could smell the tar and smoke of the cigarette, even under the smell of my cologne. Even if I had brought a change of clothes, sprayed copious amounts of cologne, and washed my hands, she could always taste it when we kissed.

All this is of course the long-winded way to say that mindfulness is a invaluable tool when deducing with a disorder that separates you from reality. Hopefully, you can use these mindfulness techniques in conjunction with abductive reasoning to reconnect with yourself and your surroundings. I apologize for the brevity of the post, but rest assured the quality and frequency of posts should be back up to standard soon.

[sleuth2k7]

using all 5 senses in observing and deducing is a pretty well known tip I think

for one, sometimes there are sounds with a source we can't see, so we only know about them through sound

we also can't *see* how things taste or feel (though we can get a vague idea through sight)

a less obvious part of this is that multiple senses can be used at the same time - deducing is sometimes visualized as a step-by-step process where each step happens in succession, and that's mainly to help beginners learn - eventually, the thought process goes faster and can overlap *because* we overlap our senses in everyday life

for example, the other day i was walking through my neighborhood

i was focused on the sky, and to the right, not to the left - i was watching the sky for a few things, and then dragging my hand across the stone wall to the right, so that's already using multiple senses at once

im walking and i realize i smell honeysuckle, so i look around and realize to my left is a line of honeysuckle bushes

had I been looking All Around, I'd have seen the honeysuckle and not even needed to smell it (since I know what honeysuckle looks like), but my eyes were preoccupied elsewhere, and I'd have missed the bushes if I hadn't been able to smell them in place of seeing them

so, point here is yes sight is probably what you're focused on when deducing, but while you're looking around using your eyes, stay aware of any noises or tastes or textures that pop up in your periphery

[blackswaneuroparedux]

Inquiry is not a method of producing answers, it is a way of learning the answer is worth.

- Neil Postman

[studies-in-the-art-of-deduction]

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

[lonesomedotmp3]

love philosophy when it's just shooting the shit about some random crap nobody cares about. when it borders on the scientific? the mathematic? let's all kill ourselves.

[ask-artsy-oncie]

I was reminded of the time that tumblr tried to make "monster high but with tumblr sexymen", and one of the characters was (obviously) the daughter of the once-ler.

And the funny thing to me about that is that in the canon of the illumination lorax movie, the once-ler is heavily implied to have an estranged daughter. I don't know all the sexymen off the top of my head but I think he might've been one of the only ones referenced in that trend who actually had a daughter in his own canon.

[snozzlefrog]

Extremely out of context spoilers for book 3