Whether to use the deductive method of Sherlock Holmes?

literary hero Conan Doyle - a brilliant detective Sherlock Holmes - says a lot and at length about his method of deduction.And this he often baffled readers who are familiar with the basic concepts of logic.After deductive reasoning - a reasoning that leads from the general to the particular.The simplest example of this argument: we are aware of the gravity of the Earth;we have a general idea of ​​what the water falls down, not rushes up;repeatedly observed the process of falling water.These general promises logically allow us to imagine what it looks like Niagara Falls (private), although we have never seen.

But we all know Sherlock Holmes uses a completely different kind of inference rather better known as induction, that is, the ascent from the particular to the general.In the mud on the shoes detective concludes that people come from rural areas, patches and tags cobbler that the host boots - not a rich man, but by sticking out of the pocket of railway tickets concludes that he came to London by train.In his famous detective solving crimes held a causal chain: the ashes of the cigar - smoker - his motives - personality of the smoker.And in the end make a conclusion: the culprit - Mister X. In the case of notorious deduction Holmes thought would go a completely different way: Mr X is very similar to a criminal, while other people zameshennye in this case, no.His dark past.He had the motive to kill the victim.At the time of the crime he has an alibi.Therefore, the killer - Mr. H.

So what is the deductive method is used in the process of solving the crime Holmes?At first, it seems that, based on the smallest details, he recreates the crime scene as if it were re-enacted in front of him.For example, in the case of the disappearance of the Agra treasure: on the trail of little feet with protruding fingers detective realizes that the man who left his mark, short stature and never wore shoes.Another mental effort, and that's you, criminal - a pygmy from the Andaman Islands.

It would seem that there is a net induction - the ascent from the particular to the general (evidence from the private to the general picture of the crime).While deductive method - a descent from the general to the particular.But in fact, no contradiction here.Holmes said: "Any life - uninterrupted causal chain, but the nature of this circuit we can examine only one of its links."Remember the example of the water and Niagara Falls?Here is another important quote from Conan Doyle, where the literary hero says of his method: "All crimes show a large affinity.They (agents of Scotland Yard) introduced me to the circumstances of a particular case.Knowing the details of 1,000 cases, it would be strange not to unravel the 1,001th. "

Thus, Holmes deductive method presupposes knowledge about the basic offenses (such as murder, theft, fraud).Killing him is classified for "family tree" of murder out of jealousy, for profit, revenge, etc.Later, it turns out that the murder in order to receive the inheritance of the Duke and murder committed for the sake of owning legacy Esquire, too, have their own specifics, and so on, down to the smallest detail.Sleuth, or rather, the author, being an Englishman, and having an idea of ​​the island (ie assumed in the British Isles) case law, based on the fact that the new, not yet disclosed the crime was a precedent in the past and need to simply bythis form fit.

We can say with confidence that, in spite of external induction, Holmes uses his logical calculations is the deductive method.Playing the violin or smoking by the fire, a brilliant detective thinks: how to categorize a particular crime?Revenge?Jealousy?Greed?Sherlock rejects all wrong as sift the wheat from the husk while in his hands will not only correct the grain.And he says about his method: "I cast aside the impossible, what remains - is the answer to the question, no matter how fantastic it may seem."