Do you think that Holmes is correct in saying this? I kept thinking of the Casey Anthony trail where her defense kept pushing that the jury could not convict her because all the evidence against her was circumstantial. Any thoughts..?
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree with him. The quote reminds me of some websites I've stumbled upon (by actually using stumbleupon.com). The websites explained how the human mind fills in all the blanks in our senses. For example, the eyes. They take in all the information, condense it to send to the brain, then the brain fills in all the spaces that were condensed. The eyes also use that trick for information that wasn't originally gathered (the eye's blindspot). The same happens with memory. Our opinions change the way we see things, therefore they change our memory. I think that's part of the reason that Holmes is so good at solving mysteries; he isn't biased at all. He merely accepts the facts of the situation. It is directly related to his apathy that he is able to solve the mysteries.
ReplyDeleteIn a not so verbose way: I absolutely agree with Holmes' statement.
I agree, however, he is not always completely unbiased. In The Boscombe Valley Mystery he decides to investigate the case assuming that McCarthy is innocent.
ReplyDeleteI also agree that the mind can bend reality to how we want to see it. Holmes is like a scientists because he tries to purely observe, and then uses past knowledge to conclude what he sees. I think sometimes it may seem like he is being biased, but he probably has logic behind it, and we simply do not know what his thought process is. He is very good at keeping opinions away from his work.
ReplyDeleteThis applies to mant things, even beyond crime. Our biased opinions take over and fill i the missing spaces. Gut feelings take over. Jurrys are biased as they are human too. Hopefully with the advancement of technology, evidence will outway circumstance and more criminals will be rightfully sentenced. On the flipside, less will be wrongfully convicted. Do you guys find times when you form opiions based on purely circumstancialevidence?
ReplyDeleteYes, I think it's mostly our subconscious, though. That's one reason I was more like Holmes. I wish I didn't "jump to conclusions." However, I think it's extremely common that people form opinions without exact evidence. Human nature and evolution have caused our minds to fill in blanks to try to discover as much information as possible.
ReplyDeleteI like how in The Beryl Coronet, Holmes almost immediately knows that it wasn't the son who stole the jewelry and tells that to Mr. Holder, then the story goes in to explain how. It's a typical Holmes move to figure it out, then go through his process at the end; in this case, however, he immediately knew the solution, then wanted more evidence before he was certain. It shows that he can make immediate predictions (though still purely logical) before he sees any 'clues.'