While the article is about cars directly, the conclusion is widely applicable: > You need to have a diagnostic approach to solving problems. And yet I have ru

While the article is about cars directly, the conclusion is widely applicable: > You need to have a diagnostic approach to solving problems. And yet I have run across so many engineers willing to blame outputs they do not understand, instead of seeking to understand what it is that they system is trying to say (and often, the message is perfectly clear, if one takes the time to read it) or systems that they do not understand or have caused them pain (often from their lack of understanding) in the past. I find myself constantly batting down "hypotheses" to the problem that do not even answer the symptoms of the problem at hand! At the very least, solutions need to make sense, and attempt to explain the circumstances. (I would argue that the quoted sentence above borders on tautology. Yet, it is a valuable, especially in the context of the article, explanation of problem solving and critical thinking.)