The article provides a fascinating insight into Sherlock Holmes’ deductive reasoning and the application of the Science of Deduction and Analysis in solving complex cases.
We use the example of “The Adventure of Silver Blaze” to illustrate how Holmes strategically collects answers to ‘small’ questions to ultimately reach a conclusive answer to the ‘big’ question, and solve the case.
The crucial part of Sherlock’s logic is to make explicit tacit information.
Tacit information = information available as answers to questions.
Sherlock applies his deductive reasoning to solve cases.
In “The Adventure of Silver Blaze,” Holmes investigates 2 crimes:
- the theft of a racehorse;
- and the murder of the horse’s trainer.
To solve the case, he focuses on the behavior of a watchdog that was present in the stables at the time of the theft.
Holmes assumes that a well-trained watchdog would bark at a stranger, and he uses this assumption to form two potential scenarios based on whether the dog barked or not.
His mind process demonstrates how he selects small questions based on what he expects to deduce from their answers, ultimately leading him closer to solving the cases.
Fascinating!
Holmes’ method of inquiry and investigation seems to work as follows:
- collecting answers to small questions;
- deducting information from these small answers;
- his background assumptions (es. 2 potential scenarios of the dog: barking or not), can lead to deductive proof that helps answer the big question;
- he strategically selects questions to guide his information-seeking process;
- he solves the case with small answers + deductions + proofs.
His skill in selecting the right questions to ask is pivotal in revealing this tacit information, allowing him to construct a deductive proof.
Deductive Process
Sherlock’s method involves breaking down a complex problem into smaller, more manageable questions, each contributing to the resolution of the larger issue.
His approach mirrors the scientific method, where the collection of evidence and data leads to a comprehensive conclusion.
The amazing memory of Sherlock helps a lot in the process because he perfectly recalls and integrates past information to form his deductions.
But let’s observe the progress of his deductive reasoning, step-by-step, to understand how he solved the cases.
Theft of a Racehorse:
- Observation and Assumption: Holmes observes the behavior of the watchdog in the stables and assumes that a well-trained watchdog would bark at a stranger.
- Formulation of Potential Scenarios: Based on the assumption, as we said before, Holmes formulates two potential scenarios: If the dog barked, it implies that the thief was not known to the dog. If the dog did not bark, it implies that the thief was someone the dog knew well.
- Question Selection: Holmes strategically selects whether the dog barked, anticipating what each potential answer would entail and how it would contribute to his overall deduction.
- Deductive Reasoning: Upon obtaining the answer, Holmes deduces that the thief was someone the dog knew well, based on the scenario where the dog did not bark.
Murder of the Horse’s Trainer:
- Inference from Evidence: Holmes infers from the evidence that Straker, the horse’s trainer, expected a second visit, as indicated by his arming himself with a knife found on his nightstand.
- Integration of Questions within Proofs: Holmes integrates questions within his proofs, such as whether Straker expected a second visit, to further elucidate the circumstances surrounding the murder and theft.
- Role of Memory: The paper attached emphasizes the role of memory in Holmes’ inquiries, highlighting how he recalls and integrates past information to form his deductions.
- Construction of Deductive Proof: Through a series of deductive steps and question integration, Holmes constructs a deductive proof that leads to the conclusive resolution of both the theft and the murder.
The criminal in both cases was the same person.
Thanks for reading this article!
Is the first of many, currently in draft.
Do you think that these principles are still useful nowadays?