6 ms·

Ask HN: How can I become like Sherlock Holmes?

12 points by gpttpg 3y ago

I know he's a fictional character but I want to improve on the skills and qualities a person like him would possess. Perhaps a mentalist comes close?

dysoco 3y ago
Somehow you brought back some memory and I remembered there's a subreddit for that [1] it seems dead nowadays but you might have some luck with the top posts if you want to find some content or discussion. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/howtobesherlock/ https://www.reddit.com/r/howtobesherlock/
jjgreen 3y ago
Take up cocaine: Holmes’s cocaine use is uniquely framed not as an addiction, but as a defiance of addiction. Holmes masters the drug as he masters the demands of his work. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/152748/ http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/152748/ It seems you can't use the same excuse for the strippers, pity.
joshestroud 3y ago
I would say: develop a meditation habit. Learning to see your thoughts leads to learning to see your life, and see the life of the people around you. J
stavros 3y ago
Learn to notice when things seem out of place, and make hypotheses about why. That'll get you close, though the sleight of hand in the Sherlock Holmes books is selecting one of the millions of hypotheses possible with the little data we have, and presenting it as fact. It's easy to appear smart when you say "you had a fight with your girlfriend, I know because you aren't wearing your Apple watch, which means you left the house in a hurry" and the other character says "wow, spot on". In reality, they'd say "no, it just stopped working so I sent it back".
vwoolf 3y ago
Learn how to do cold reads of people and situations. Cold read enough, and with enough vagueness, and you'll be right enough of the time. You could also ask: "How can I be like William of Baskerville?"
- smegsicle 3y ago
  "how can i be like basil of baker street?"
EchoChamberMan 3y ago
"The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes." - Sir Author Conan Doyle 1) Pay attention. 2) Ask the writers' questions: who, what, where, when, why, and how. 3) Read. I also agree with this[1] comment - meditation promotes mental clarity. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39448694 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39448694
gpttpg 3y ago
How can I effectively narrow down the search space? I often observe myself to be going around circles/stuck in rabbit holes. Lack of clarity perhaps. I was thinking of something along the lines of CEA (I felt that I could relate to this) with better heuristics if it makes sense. Sort of like optimized bruteforce methods. If it doesn't, then it would be helpful to know why and what can I do to improve on these flaws. I asked this question partly because I have seen people with really good investigative/debugging skills and it reminded me of Sherlock Holmes. "How do they do it?" This question would often strike my mind.
- EchoChamberMan 3y ago
  It's about understanding the system holistically, and recognizing patterns. If I understand 'p -> q', and I observe 'q', I can deduce 'p'. Obviously, this is the simplest example, and real systems are more complicated, but it all works off of understanding causality. If you understand projectile physics, and you find a projectile, you can deduce the path taken. (The arrow of time is one of physic's big mysteries though.)
  - gpttpg 3y ago
    What concrete approaches would you take to internalize this?
    - EchoChamberMan 3y ago
      I think the major driving factor would be curiosity, which is why I like the Conan Doyle quote - all the information is there, but it must be observed, and often the way to do that is to keep asking "why?" "Q" is true - why? Well, "P -> Q". Then, why is "P"? Toyota uses this strategy, they call it "Five whys."[1] Unfortunately, society is not super fond of this, as it is probing, and rather difficult. Just think of kids asking "Why is the sky blue?" Not a popular question with adults. A second big point would be to realize that everything is part of a system. Nothing exists in a vacuum. As part of science, we using modelling which assumes vacuums or other inaccuracies to make reasoning possible. Think of the "spherical cow".[2] These simplifications make reasoning easier, but have hard limits that must be recognized. Quantum mechanics are true at a tiny scale, and relativity is true at a macro scale, but we do not have a well tested unifying theory (string theory and such are possible explanations).[3] Physicists are still asking why to understand. As for growing these skills, that's tricky. Arthur Conon Doyale was a physician[4]; he studied an incredibly wide range of topics to inform himself. Knowledge is required, and unfortunately, the way to knowledge is through experience. The story of the master ship builder who looks for an hour, and taps once to fix a broken ship is true - you've identified it yourself. The process of gaining experience is one that people would love to hack, but unfortunately, in real life, there are no silver bullets. Your best "hack" here is probably meditation, though it sounds strange. The other "hack" might be one of "always saying yes" like in the Jim Carrey movie "Yes Man."[5] You get a lot of experience rather quickly always saying yes, but it seems rather dangerous too. Reading a lot helps: HN is a great source of diverse information which is nice. One of, if not the biggest, problem with Capitalistic commodification of labor is the reduction of human capability. Briefly, we see this in a few places: one is the devaluation of experience, and the other is the preference for credentials over skills. Experience allows humans to grow - a junior dev can, in fact, become a senior dev. Most commodities cannot do this: your tier 2 generic branded Orange Juice can never improve to become a tier 1 Tropicana OJ. So, experience isn't valuable to some people who treat humans like commodities. The credentials come into play because they can be used, theoretically and incorrectly, to identify you as Tier 1 Tropicana or Tier 2 generic brand OJ. Capitalism baby. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Conan_Doyle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Conan_Doyle [5] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1068680/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1068680/
sfmz 3y ago
Books heavier in critical thinking include espionage titles, detective novels and criminal profiler literature. Predict outcomes; adjust your model if your prediction fails. I think Sherlock knows a bit about chemistry and such as well.
8bitsrule 3y ago
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holmesian_fallacy https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holmesian_fallacy
- EchoChamberMan 3y ago
  One does not have to identify "every" possibility - one works within reason. Spontaneous combustion might be possible, but it's certainly not reasonable. [Edit] Or you can take an unbounded approach and never reach convergence, i.e. understanding.
tmaly 3y ago
There was a part in one of the books where Holmes talks about being careful about what you fill your head with. I think that is the key
jacknews 3y ago
cocaine?
simonblack 3y ago
Ask Arthur Conan Doyle to write about you.

12 points by gpttpg 3y ago

I know he's a fictional character but I want to improve on the skills and qualities a person like him would possess. Perhaps a mentalist comes close?

dysoco 3y ago

Somehow you brought back some memory and I remembered there's a subreddit for that [1] it seems dead nowadays but you might have some luck with the top posts if you want to find some content or discussion. [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/howtobesherlock/ https://www.reddit.com/r/howtobesherlock/

jjgreen 3y ago

Take up cocaine: Holmes’s cocaine use is uniquely framed not as an addiction, but as a defiance of addiction. Holmes masters the drug as he masters the demands of his work. http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/152748/ http://eprints.gla.ac.uk/152748/ It seems you can't use the same excuse for the strippers, pity.

joshestroud 3y ago

I would say: develop a meditation habit. Learning to see your thoughts leads to learning to see your life, and see the life of the people around you. J

stavros 3y ago

Learn to notice when things seem out of place, and make hypotheses about why. That'll get you close, though the sleight of hand in the Sherlock Holmes books is selecting one of the millions of hypotheses possible with the little data we have, and presenting it as fact. It's easy to appear smart when you say "you had a fight with your girlfriend, I know because you aren't wearing your Apple watch, which means you left the house in a hurry" and the other character says "wow, spot on". In reality, they'd say "no, it just stopped working so I sent it back".

vwoolf 3y ago

Learn how to do cold reads of people and situations. Cold read enough, and with enough vagueness, and you'll be right enough of the time. You could also ask: "How can I be like William of Baskerville?"

smegsicle 3y ago
"how can i be like basil of baker street?"

EchoChamberMan 3y ago

"The world is full of obvious things which nobody by any chance ever observes." - Sir Author Conan Doyle 1) Pay attention. 2) Ask the writers' questions: who, what, where, when, why, and how. 3) Read. I also agree with this[1] comment - meditation promotes mental clarity. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39448694 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39448694

gpttpg 3y ago

How can I effectively narrow down the search space? I often observe myself to be going around circles/stuck in rabbit holes. Lack of clarity perhaps. I was thinking of something along the lines of CEA (I felt that I could relate to this) with better heuristics if it makes sense. Sort of like optimized bruteforce methods. If it doesn't, then it would be helpful to know why and what can I do to improve on these flaws. I asked this question partly because I have seen people with really good investigative/debugging skills and it reminded me of Sherlock Holmes. "How do they do it?" This question would often strike my mind.

EchoChamberMan 3y ago
It's about understanding the system holistically, and recognizing patterns. If I understand 'p -> q', and I observe 'q', I can deduce 'p'. Obviously, this is the simplest example, and real systems are more complicated, but it all works off of understanding causality. If you understand projectile physics, and you find a projectile, you can deduce the path taken. (The arrow of time is one of physic's big mysteries though.)
- gpttpg 3y ago
  What concrete approaches would you take to internalize this?
  - EchoChamberMan 3y ago
    I think the major driving factor would be curiosity, which is why I like the Conan Doyle quote - all the information is there, but it must be observed, and often the way to do that is to keep asking "why?" "Q" is true - why? Well, "P -> Q". Then, why is "P"? Toyota uses this strategy, they call it "Five whys."[1] Unfortunately, society is not super fond of this, as it is probing, and rather difficult. Just think of kids asking "Why is the sky blue?" Not a popular question with adults. A second big point would be to realize that everything is part of a system. Nothing exists in a vacuum. As part of science, we using modelling which assumes vacuums or other inaccuracies to make reasoning possible. Think of the "spherical cow".[2] These simplifications make reasoning easier, but have hard limits that must be recognized. Quantum mechanics are true at a tiny scale, and relativity is true at a macro scale, but we do not have a well tested unifying theory (string theory and such are possible explanations).[3] Physicists are still asking why to understand. As for growing these skills, that's tricky. Arthur Conon Doyale was a physician[4]; he studied an incredibly wide range of topics to inform himself. Knowledge is required, and unfortunately, the way to knowledge is through experience. The story of the master ship builder who looks for an hour, and taps once to fix a broken ship is true - you've identified it yourself. The process of gaining experience is one that people would love to hack, but unfortunately, in real life, there are no silver bullets. Your best "hack" here is probably meditation, though it sounds strange. The other "hack" might be one of "always saying yes" like in the Jim Carrey movie "Yes Man."[5] You get a lot of experience rather quickly always saying yes, but it seems rather dangerous too. Reading a lot helps: HN is a great source of diverse information which is nice. One of, if not the biggest, problem with Capitalistic commodification of labor is the reduction of human capability. Briefly, we see this in a few places: one is the devaluation of experience, and the other is the preference for credentials over skills. Experience allows humans to grow - a junior dev can, in fact, become a senior dev. Most commodities cannot do this: your tier 2 generic branded Orange Juice can never improve to become a tier 1 Tropicana OJ. So, experience isn't valuable to some people who treat humans like commodities. The credentials come into play because they can be used, theoretically and incorrectly, to identify you as Tier 1 Tropicana or Tier 2 generic brand OJ. Capitalism baby. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Five_whys [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_cow [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_interaction [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Conan_Doyle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Conan_Doyle [5] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1068680/ https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1068680/

sfmz 3y ago

Books heavier in critical thinking include espionage titles, detective novels and criminal profiler literature. Predict outcomes; adjust your model if your prediction fails. I think Sherlock knows a bit about chemistry and such as well.

8bitsrule 3y ago

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holmesian_fallacy https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Holmesian_fallacy

EchoChamberMan 3y ago
One does not have to identify "every" possibility - one works within reason. Spontaneous combustion might be possible, but it's certainly not reasonable. [Edit] Or you can take an unbounded approach and never reach convergence, i.e. understanding.

tmaly 3y ago

There was a part in one of the books where Holmes talks about being careful about what you fill your head with. I think that is the key

jacknews 3y ago

cocaine?

simonblack 3y ago

Ask Arthur Conan Doyle to write about you.