This posting was motivated by the following quotation I found in my in box this morning:
I like not to know for as long as possible because then it tells me the truth instead of me imposing the truth. Michael Moschen
TheAnthroGuys spend a great deal of time trying to use and teach the use and limits of analytic induction. This is more than just a curricular objective; it is an impassioned crusade, a holy war against the zombies of common sense. This may sound somewhat over-eager for some but the power of common sense is typically unassailable. Left unchallenged, “common sense” – supported by humans’ penchant for retrospective sense making – claims the final word in most cases.
A case in point is a colleague’s reference to our use of the term “analytic induction” as oxymoronic. But analytic induction is not an oxymoron. Rather, it is an effective methodology of managing many observations made in most research contexts. Deduction and induction can be thought of in cyclical relationship to each other. With analytic induction, one is able to think outside of the box systematically. One can approach problems and expect more than the accidental inspiration of the “ah-ha moment”.
In Ethnography for Marketers (2006), Hy Mariampolski references a term he calls “magic”, to invoke such terminology for the very same reason that we are trying to focus on this problem. In a section entitled, “creating imaginative interpretations” Mariampolski urges readers to move beyond the initial assumptions about what one sees in the field.
Recently published a fine line (2009) further illustrates the power of systematically thinking outside of the common sense. Written by Hartmut Esslinger, founder of Frog Design, this sort of advice could not come from a better source. Esslinger starts the book by pointing out how “out of the box” his approach has been and how very successful it has been due to its rigor.
It is not easy to liberate the truth from the burden of one’s own gut instincts or the sense that seems common to all, but if given enough time, time to “not know for as long as possible”, as Michael Moschen states, then the rich rewards of true creativity become available.
TheAnthroGeek
anthroguy
Felicia Salcido
37 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 13, 2009 at 1:14 pm
JulianaR
I have to agree that analytic induction is not an oxymoron. It makes perfect sense that you would take facts about a subject and then introduce an assumption from that data. Even though the assumption that you made from the beginning from the facts may vary in the end from the actual result, it does not mean that the credibility of the original assumption is absolete. At that point before the result could have been fully observed, the idea that was created from the beginning data was in fact correct.
November 14, 2009 at 4:04 pm
AdamShamoon
This article stated that “common sense” needs to be challenged. Mariampolski (who wrote an ethnography book) said you have to “move beyond initial assumptions about what one sees in the field.”
The author felt that to be able to observe the real “truth” about an observation, you have to think “outside the box” and not just rely on your own “gut instinct.”
I think this is true of most issues in our society today. It is easy to just believe things we read and hear and not explore the real facts.
For an anthropologist, I would think it would be particularly important to look for creative angles that are different than preconceived ideas (gut instinct) about what is happening in an observation.
I would think that if an anthropologist did not explore different ways to look at an observation, then he would not find the “truth” of the observation, and the result would thus be incorrect.
November 29, 2009 at 4:41 pm
JosephA
I fell that “common sense” does not need to be challenged, but on the other hand I do agree that you need to “move beyond your initial assumptions about what one sees in the field.” Yeah these two things might be somewhat alike or go hand in hand, but I feel that you should not challenge your common sense because most of the time when you use common sense you are right. You can support your common sense with research but I wouldn’t challenge it right away. I feel that you need to “move beyond your initial assumption of what one sees in the field” because when you assume things, you may block out other possibilities or answers to a question or research project. When you assume something you can confine your research because you have tunnel vision and don’t think about other situations.
November 29, 2009 at 11:37 pm
Josh
I agree with you and the author. I dont think that when in the field and anthropologist should ever go off of a gut feeling. Like I said in my post, this field is all about really studying people, how would we get anything out of it if we always went by our gut feeling? Research is key in our field, its very important that we take time to study before we make any kind of assumption.
November 16, 2009 at 3:29 pm
KenB
I do not agree with your colleague who stated that analytic induction was oxymoronic. When trying to solve a problem, I believe one must try and figure out an answer from one’s initial knowledge. Through the examiniation of the question this first inductive answer will either be proven or not. I believe this is the very basis of the scientific equation. I believe anthropologists use analytic induction all the time when it comes to their observations. Through their experiments and observations of people, the ideas they started out with are either confirmed or not. I don’t see any other way to perform scientific research.
November 17, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Whitney Menefee
The quote in which this blog is based around is a thought provoking statement. To know something for the “real reasons”, in my opinion, is much better than knowing something for reason alone. By “real reasons”, I mean reasons that an independent individual have come up with through personal observations, thought, and the ability to interpret what has been observed from their personal standpoint. The conclusions that an individual draws should be the reasoning behind the knowledge. I think that the quote/statement given at the beginning was trying to convey this point. Find truth, don’t impose it.
Common sense is what seems like the oxymoron to me. How can we sense what is common, if nothing is common. It is true that has as humans we share the knowledge of some universal truths. However, as humans we are extremely diverse. Thought processes and the way we perceive the world differs drastically. Common sense was described in this blog as “humans’ penchant for retrospective sense making.” Thus common sense to some may not be so common to others. Humans experience different things in different ways. While humans may come to the same conclusions of common sense it may not be understood why this conclusion was drawn, or it may not be understood why the same conclusion may be drawn for different reasons. Observing and learning things for ones self is the key here.
I fear the common sense is not as common as we may think. The ability for humans to think analytically is slowly degenerating, not due to ability, but lack of practice. As a future science teacher one of my main goals is to guide students to be analytical thinkers. I feel that as humans we take for granted the knowledge we do have and this masks our desire for more knowledge.
November 18, 2009 at 2:07 pm
Angel Mendez
“…a holy war against the zombies of common sense.” How a appropriate a statement. That is what the perceived notion of common sense turns us into…zombies. If something cannot be explained by common sense then we wander around aimlessly searching for the answer as a zombie wandering about aimlessly until the next meal falls into their lap. “Retrospective sense making,” as stated by this blog, can be compared to fitting a round peg in a round hole. When a square peg is presented it becomes easier to discard the peg rather than looking for the square hole.
Common sense can be very crippling, and terribly debilitating to ones desire to think “outside the box.” The idea of common sense gives people a safe warm feeling compared to that of a favorite blanket to a child. “I have common sense, therefore I know enough to survive in my environment.” No reasoning method should be discarded so lightly, especially one that takes all facts into consideration and may lead to any conclusion that isn’t common.
November 18, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Andrew S
When I start to think about what the quotation is actually saying I think that it is pretty interesting. You have no way of putting your own spin on what reality actually is if you have just heard it for the first time. In terms of speaking outside of the box, I think that common sense gets in the way a lot. Many people claim that they like to think outside of the box, but when I think about it, it is very difficult to do so because it is so hard to shut out your common sense that is telling you otherwise. For example, it used to be common sense that the world was flat, and anyone who thought otherwise was completely off base. If not for someone who started thinking outside of the box, we would have never found out that the world is actually not flat. To think outside the box, you have to go in with the possibility of being wrong, which is one of the reasons it is actually difficult to do. With that said, in certain cases, like discovery the true shape of the earth, it can be very helpful. The problem is not letting your common sense get in the way of possibly finding out something totally new.
November 20, 2009 at 2:02 am
KellyK
I agree common sense is not a simple thing to just push out of mind. Most people tend to just go with the common sense theory and avoid the fact that there may be a slight possibly that it could be something else. The thought of going againist the common way is difficult and it may be judged like andrew said if you do look outside of the common sense thought it id possible that you can be looked at and thought of as a freak or something. It appears that common sense is not always common sense.
December 1, 2009 at 3:40 pm
Ray Millard
I agree with you Kelly, but how often do people fail in life due to the lack of common sense? More often than not, people commit crimes because they have no common sense or possibly on drugs which prevents them from making any rational decisions. I believe that our prison systems are overcrowded because people make choices because of the lack of common sense not necessarily because they went with their gut feeling.
December 6, 2009 at 4:26 pm
Gabriel R
Haha, good insight into the past ideas of the world being flat. That nails the necessity of analytic induction right on the head. Simplistic thinking has led to much of the worlds “common sense,” even in the face of facts and evidence. I see this idea play out quite a bit in our political system where people follow political leaders or vote based on gut feelings not fact or analytic induction. Just because something feels right doesn’t necessarily make it right or justifiable.
I think most people are sheep who are content following the masses in the ways of making their decisions. Very few people go against the grain of “common sense,” yet it is those who constantly battle uphill in the face of such odds that lead to new innovation.
December 11, 2009 at 3:28 pm
Ray Millard
Gabriel, I think that this is a good example of what society thinks common sense is for people wearing deodorant. This is common for many house hold items that Americans think are common sense to use in order to maintain a normal status in society. I agree with you, “Common sense is tightly intertwined with cultural identification.” This is why there is the study of Anthropology. We try to find out what and why there are cultural identification differences amongst different societies. What I find interesting is the cultural difference amongst closely related societies. An example of two close societies that differ would be America and Canada. How can two very similar countries have such drastic cultural differences?
November 27, 2009 at 1:14 pm
Kip Macarthur
I really agree with the comments about the statement, “…a holy war against the zombies of common sense.” I feel that many people become “zombies” of common sense when that’s all that they rely on. These people never challenge their thinking or ideas, they just go along with what they have been been taught in the past. People like this never think “outside of the box” because they are scared to go against what they have been told is correct and therefore they will never be the ones to invent or innovate. I think that these people stick to common sense because it is what they know and they are afraid to change because change is a scary thing for human beings. Some people also just may feel like they will be looked down upon or looked at like an outcast if they come up with some “crazy” idea that does not come from their normal common sense way of thinking. Common sense is like a safety blanket or something else that people find comforting which is why they are very hesitant to think “outside the box” and go against their common sense sometimes. Common sense is a very complicated subject to speak about and at the same time is very important for individuals to have and use common sense, but I think that every once in a while we need to step outside of our comfort zone and go against what common sense is telling us.
November 29, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Nadine S
Moschen’s statement is definitely a valid one. To not know for as long as possible may seem odd to some, but in all reality if one is told or does know then one doesn’t further look into something. If we are given the answer or simply told it is “common sense” then we tend not to look past the idea. Thus, we become the zombies of common sense. In many respects if we are told it is truth then we believe it is truth. This is not necessarily true in every aspect of our lives, but many times if there is a majority we tend not to dispute it. At times, I along with many others do not dare go against the grain. Rather we in a sense, fall in line of what is norm. Maybe this is what allows for brilliant minds to flourish, as some sit back, others take it upon themselves to discover truth…not our truth, not the majority, but their own truth…one not influenced, taught or lead.
This also brings to point the idea of common sense. What is common sense? For something to be common does not take much, a group of people agreeing on one subject may make something common to some, but still this does not make it truth. I suppose we would have to look at what people deem to be common sense, but that would simply take too long.
Like Moschen I would rather not know for as long as possible, but I cannot say this in all instances because to not know is a scary thing. This is probably why so many people fail to learn their own truth and make their own assumptions. People fear the unknown, they like having an answer, a sense of certainty. This dissuades furthering our knowledge and giving us the ability to think outside the box, but reassuringly it gives one a sense of comfort.
November 29, 2009 at 11:30 pm
Josh
In the case of anthrowpology, I don’t think that the term, “Common Sense” should even be used. This field is about learning a culture by intense hours of study time within the culture. If and anthrowpologist went into the field and assumed something based on what he/she thought was common sense, would anything really be established? I think that in most aspects of life common sense is something that is important and should always be assumed and used, but in the case of anthrowpology I feel as if first impression assumptions should be avoided at all cost.
November 30, 2009 at 4:54 pm
michelleva
Determining whether or not common sense should be used or not is an odd question. I don’t think we have the ability to stray from what comes naturally. Our instincts are to use common sense to understand what is going on around us, therefore why try to contain it. Research has its place in understanding people, I am in no way trying to down play that. I just think that in order to understand research we must use common sense to make conclusions. The two must work hand in hand to work most effectively. So I believe the term “analytic induction” is very probable. We first analyze something then use our common sense to come up with an idea.
I like this topic though, even if we are running in circles. It keeps you thinking about how our minds work and how we take for granted the work it does every day.
December 1, 2009 at 12:53 am
MarcoL
“Common Sense” vs. “Analytic Induction”
Both important as a human social component, but not necessarily a requirement. I believe it’s one or the other that get us to where we want to be within our lives. One trait may feed off the other; therefore, I do believe they have some similarities. Common sense is what we all expect the other person to automatically have and/or demonstrate with or without knowing our expectations. Analytic Induction, I believe is more of a learned trait: the ability to separate things into their constituent parts in order to study or examine them, draw conclusions, or solve problems is not “Common sense”. That can take time, knowledge, experience, and a lot more intellectual capabilities of the individual (s) involved. Common sense can be learned from repetitiveness as to where analytic induction is not. So the next time you say “its common sense” to someone, ensure they are someone with similar standards as yourself in order for them to make sense of the common situation.
December 1, 2009 at 11:34 am
Brandon Wright
This blog brings up a very interesting topic, and rather leaves room for much debate in regard to what is labeled as “common sense” and moving beyond such. The first issue in regards to common sense it what we define as common sense. From an anthropological stand point, I feel that this topic relates to several of the modules that we explored earlier in the semester. What one group may define as common sense may not be the same for another group. There are several factors that must be taken into consideration when basing an argument on common sense. There are cultural, religious, economic, and social factors that may affect common sense. An example can be seen in the use of something as simple as a television. Most people would argue that if you can not hear the television, than it is common sense to turn up the volume. However, a person in a third world country who has never seen a television or been around someone who watches TV would not see this as common knowledge. The person who has never been exposed to such technology may assume that the television is a silent visual electronic box.
This also leads to the next point of the blog. Beyond the argument of common sense is the argument of thinking outside of the box. I believe it is important that people look beyond their general knowledge and further investigate their assumptions. The same example can be applied to the television in the third world country scenario. The same person who never seen technology such as a television and made the general assumption that the technology doesn’t come with sound, is the kind of person who stops at their general assumption. If he or she chooses to think out side of the norm and explore beyond their basic knowledge, then that person would have discovered a set of buttons either on the television set or on the remote control. Further exploration of such buttons would reveal that sound is included and can be adjusted to various levels through the activation of such buttons. Looking beyond the general assumption and what was in the persons face led to a discovery of something that they didn’t expect.
I believe that these examples illustrate some of the points that the blog was making. It is important to look beyond the surface of what is presented to us as we may stumble upon a discovery and come to a different conclusion by simply continuing to challenge our initial belief and assumption.
December 1, 2009 at 3:39 pm
Ray Millard
I agree with this blog, the rewards of not knowing the future are truly magnificent. I believe it would often be convenient to know what the future holds for us but that would take away from what life is truly about. We go through life enjoying all the surprises it holds. I could not imagine how simple and boring our lives would be if we knew how it would end. However, if given the option to know, many people would choose to find out. I believe that most people want to take the easy way out of things rather than going through life not knowing what struggles or success may be a head.
December 2, 2009 at 5:52 pm
Gabriel R
Common sense leads to massive oversimplification of many things and the results of which can be catastrophic. Common sense is tightly intertwined with cultural identification. What may seem to be common to a person in mexico may seem extreme and/or ridiculous to person in China. So the idea that common sense is common to all is a huge fallacy. Eating habits, personal hygeine, and modes of recreation are just some examples where the common sense idea breaks down. For example I think its common sense for a person to wear deoderant to fend of body odor. However, some european people do not hold such values and thus forgo deoderant.
December 15, 2009 at 7:09 pm
Andrew Liddle
I agree that much of what we call “common sense” is culturally defined, but there are a lot more “common sense” ideas that are deeply ingrained in our psyche. “Common sense” dictates that it’s not very smart to let a Black Widow crawl on your bare skin, and the natural fear of spiders that most people have is reflective of that. It’s also “common sense” that it’s not a good idea to stand on the edge of a cliff and lean as far over the edge as you can, ergo most people have a healthy fear of heights. Our self-preservation instincts are a direct result of “common sense” thinking. So, while “common sense” may not be the best solution for some situations, it is important to remember that, in many ways, “common sense” is largely responsible for the survival of the human race.
December 3, 2009 at 8:56 pm
Brenda C
Michael Moschen quote presented a great discussion about imposing the truth, common sense and analytic induction. I agree that analytic induction isn’t an oxymoron; but rather common sense is. It depends in the environment a person was raised in or is currently living in, which determines whether or not they will have common sense. Then when people do have common sense, the commons sense of one person is not always similar to the common sense of another. These are the reasons why I believe that although it is good to have a common sense; one should not always base the truth on their own common sense or initial gut feelings. The reason for analytic induction is for anthropologist not to impose truth based on their “initial assumptions of what they see in the field.” They have to be open-minded, able to receive others thoughts about the topic being researched, by observing others in different social groups.
December 6, 2009 at 4:16 pm
Gabriel R
Being open minded, what a wonderful idea that seems so simple to employ. However, to do so one must go against the norms that they were raised with to see things more objectively. This simple task asks people to suspend their belief system, which is a very hard thing to do. Techniques such as analytic induction is this practice of dampening the effects of gut feelings and “common sense” to get a better and truer understanding of the subject being studied. I feel that most people out of laziness or ignorance largely skip this type of reasoning ease of following common sense.
December 6, 2009 at 6:25 pm
Cary Reents
Every brilliant idea came from work and time. The time wasted waiting for that “ah-ha” moment is time that no longer exists with a purpose. The idea of being open minded, to me, means that you allow yourself to take input that you would never have thought of thanking before. Analytic induction has its benefits tho. It allows people to complete a difficult task that involves nothing more than analyzing the facts. Such as math and certain sciences. These areas sometiems rely on just the facts and the exemption of “gut feelings” and “common sense”. Every person uses both methods, analytic and common sense, in their daily lives. In my opinion, almost every decision we make uses a combination of both factors. I think that both of these aspects go hand-in-hand.
December 8, 2009 at 9:02 pm
MarleneS
I find Michael Moschen’s quote, “ I like not to know for as long as possible because then it tells me the truth instead of me imposing the truth.” to be interesting. I feel that it is basically saying that people are not interested or afraid to know the truth, so they would just rather want to believe what they hear. I probably would be one of those people that would rather not know. I think not knowing the future is a part of living. If we knew the future it would be boring and I feel that it takes away what life is really all about.
I agree with you and the author. You cant really just rely on your “gut feeling” in order to find the real “truth”. I think we should be able to observe and think outside the box. I feel that if we were to just go off of our gut instinct we would miss out on things in life. Although, I have experienced with certain occasions going with my gut instinct and turning out to be true, but there has also been many times that I don’t go with my gut instincts and I was glad that I didn’t.
I believe this is one of our big issues in today’s society. We have our minds set on certain things that we intend to forget to have an open mind about things. I believe it is easier said than done for thinking out side the box. If we just believe what we hear or read then, we really don’t know what the true facts are.
I agree it is important for an anthropologist to look beyond creative angles instead of their gut instinct when doing an observation. I don’t think “common sense” should be used in this field. Common sense is basically a personal judgment of a situation that seems right to you. So therefore, an anthropologist would not find the real truth if they were going to base the truth with common sense. This would make the result false. So I agree that anthropology should not use common sense.
December 17, 2009 at 11:50 pm
Jasmeen K
I agree, we tend to block the truth that we don’t want to face and pretend to live in our own world of lies where everything is good. Many people run from reality because it is scary, and tend to hide themselves in own little world.
December 12, 2009 at 1:15 am
Raul Lopez
When common sense is true to the individual, why challenge it? I do agree with this post, in that, making assumptions only limits your creativity. The process of, thinking outside the box’ sounds like an overran cliché, yet many famous artist became famous for pushing the envelope. For anthropologist, they want to know what and who defines common sense. What makes sense here in the states can be false in another country. Often, human tendency does not question, what makes sense. It is a human nature to make assumptions. I agree with this post, that creativity can be found when we stop making assumptions and allows us to be open minded. In doing so, discoveries are made: new music is created, new artist inspiration are made, etc. As noted in the blog, analytic induction is useful in anthropology, it is a systematic way of observation. It breaks down into peaces the different element of an observation.
December 12, 2009 at 11:10 am
Tyler Riddick
I like this quote and I think that it is saying that it is better to let the evidence of the truth be discovered rather than trying to dig for what you think is the truth. When searching for the truth one might perceive things differently than they really are to prove the truth is something that is in agreement with what they already believe. Furthermore, I think the ability to use common sense is very important humans to be able to do. Common sense allows humans to better deal with their environment by giving them expectations of the ways things should be. Common sense helps humans in social situations to blend in without knowing any of the people around them. For example, it is common sense that you don’t blow your nose into a cloth napkin at a nice dinner. It is acceptable to blow your nose in a tissue of a cloth handkerchief and not a napkin, but how is someone supposed to know this custom or something similar if they are never taught it. The answer is it’s common sense. It is a concept so simple and universal that one should know it without being told. In my opinion, humans ability to use common sense is an evolutionary trait that helps them in social situations. Those with no common sense were shunned from ostracized from societies and shunned from social circles.
December 12, 2009 at 12:46 pm
CelinaG
I disagree that common sense should be challenged. I believe that common sense is what prevents major accidents, helps people make good decisions and in many practices, such as the health care field, helps practitioners treat patients to the best of their ability. Instead of challenging common sense, we should be finding evidence to support it. If that evidence is non existent than we can rebuild our original case. It’s not that I disagree with “thinking outside the box”, we should always be striving for creativity and adversity in our education, profession or recreational activities but that doesn’t mean using common sense is a negative thing. In fact, I wish more people had and used common sense on a daily basis. In the case of anthropology however, instead of avoiding common sense maybe observations should just be based on a blank slate, taking in all angles and ideas without personal assumptions which is different than common sense.
December 13, 2009 at 1:38 am
Isabel Gonzalez
The idea of common sense does indeed convert us into “zombies”. We are so quick to turn to the obvious answer to a question or explanation, that we throw out the possibility of other solutions right out the window. However, i dont agree that challenging it is always neccessary. Yes analytic inductions helped to develop ideas outside the “box” but sometimes that might not be neccesary when common sense is the plain truth. Common sense helps avoid accidents and major mistakes. I firmly believe in creativity and pushing the idea of “thinking outside the box” becuase it leads to great achivements. But i think it depends on the situation.
December 17, 2009 at 9:14 pm
Maria A
True, if we were to just wait a while to think our answers through we may find a better solution than just the first one that pops into our heads. This will help us to get rid of the time when we do do the first thing that pops into our head and later we ask each other why did I do that, I could have done something different which could have been easier. If you do go outside the box as you said there may just be something that is better than the result you may get before you actually took the time to think well of your other options.
December 13, 2009 at 11:49 pm
Daniella Echeveste
I like Michael Moschen quotation, this can be a good way to describe inductive reasoning. I do think that inductive reasoning sometimes produces answer that can better suit a problem than other types of reasoning such as deductive reasoning. I also agree that inductive reason is more than a ah-ha moment, there is more cognitive thinking to it. By thinking out of the box we produce answers that are indeed more creative. However I do think that we need to use other reasoning methods when dealing with people. I agree with the reader that people are different therefore vary in their experiences having various amounts of common sense. So I do not think it is a bad reasoning for everyone, but I do think that this “thinking out of the box” can fill in the gaps for those who do not have great levels of common sense. I do think that sometimes your gut instinct can lead you to a correct conclusion so it is not necessarily a burden to me.
December 15, 2009 at 7:03 pm
Andrew Liddle
I think that it is important to note that “common sense” is a direct result of thousands of years of evolutionary pressures that selected against individuals whose mind frame didn’t allow for “common sense.” Today’s world is very different from the world that faced our ancient forbearers. The problem is that some of those modules, or mindsets, in our brains have become somewhat outdated. It behooves us, then to “think outside the box,” so that we can come up with better ways of solving problems than our ancient ancestors were inclined to. This is not to knock the evolutionary way of thinking about things, or “common sense.” It has worked for us for many thousands of years after all. Some would say, “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” I would say, “What can a little tweaking hurt?” It was “tweaking” that brought us the advent of the airplane, development of the semiconductor, and the modern miracle of the internet. For thousands of years people have waited for the “aha” moments to strike seemingly at random. I think it’s fantastic that we are developing systematic ways of extracting those “aha” moments instead of waiting for them.
December 16, 2009 at 4:28 pm
JenniferB
I tend to agree with the quote by Michael Moschen. I too would prefer to not know as long as possible so that I may find the truth on my own rather than have the truth imposed upon me. I believe I have a better understanding when i am able to work out a problem and draw connections on my own. We can see through out history when “truths” are imposed upon us, such as the example given previously, ” the earth is flat” or “the earth is the center of the universe”. I think that we can rely on common sense and what other’s tell us too much. Haven’t you ever heard someone tell you something they believe to be an absolute truth by starting the sentence ” They say …”. Who are they and were are they getting their information? I think it is important in any field to think outside the box. If we never tried to learn a new truth how can we move forward toward progress? I would think that in this day and age and after seeing where we have had common sense be wrong before we would try to challenge ideas. I also agree with Whitney Menefee when she pointed out that the ability for humans to think analytically is degenerating from lack of practice and not due to ability or lack of intelligence. With the improvements in information technology, we have access to so much information and research.Why are we out of practice and why are we content to be part of the flock of sheep? While I do feel we should challenge common sense, I do also believe that when a piece of common sense has been validated it is perfectly acceptable to use as fact.
December 17, 2009 at 2:34 am
Sally S
Common sense does have to be challenged. If no one challenges common sense, then many incorrect things assumed to be correct because they are “just common sense.” For example, many settlers of the American West assumed that the natives were savages. It was common sense to them, since they were different. Because someone challenged this common sense, we know that they were not savages simply a different culture. Besides common sense, when looked at from the larger perspective, is not common at all. I, for example, find it practical to keep some candy stashed away for when I just need something sweet. To me it’s common sense to have something sweet on hand as it tends to make me less cranky, but not everyone feels the same way.
I would prefer to discover something for myself than have someone just tell me if at all possible. There is more pride and understanding involved in a discovery of a concept or an idea than if it is handed to one on a silver platter. That is why there are experiments as a part of science classes. In the anthropological sense, it is why researchers actually collect data instead of just using “common sense” to infer things about a group of people. Observation is the best way to learn about a great many things especially people. Now that’s just common sense.
December 17, 2009 at 1:18 pm
NimA
The quote by Michael Moschen is very poignant. The aspect of intuition and stern hard facts, I believe should both be used. We have the abilities and minds to sift through information and place it in its appropriate categories, be that with what we “feel” and what we know. I think there is a credibility factor to which we rely on for the things we do know without question and then there are the “gut-instincts” that can be right or wrong, or perhaps somewhere in between. I don’t believe that analytical induction is an oxymoron, since given that the first part of this process is based on what is determinedly already known, and the next step would be based on this. And instead of just broadly swinging ideas and theories, an actual systematic process can develop wherein these ideas and theories can be refined and developed.
I also interpreted the statement by Moschen “I like not to know for as long as possible…” as not giving what is known full credibility, so one can be open to other possibilities or options that wouldn’t be open to them in general. I don’t think there is nothing wrong in this regard since some of our greatest discoveries were determined by someone “thinking outside of the box.” But doing this blindly or whole hearted based on intuition might be foolish and time consuming.
December 18, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Gary Grubb
I started to depict the underlying meaning of Michael Moschen’s statement; “I like not to know for as long as possible because then it tells me the truth instead of me imposing the truth.”
It reminded me of a teacher who repeatedly told our class that there is no truth. Truth is subjective to the person in which the “truth” is being told to. Jut because something is “true” doesn’t mean you have to believe it; so to you, it isn’t the truth.
Moschen’s statement calls to mind the inquiry, “Does the end justify the means?” More clearly, if you look at the end result of a situation, are the factors leading up to it acceptable?
What if you don’t know those fluffy extra facts and just know the end result, then you don’t have to ponder if the means were correct, valid, justifiable, proper, etc, or if they weren’t. In essence, it doesn’t alter your perception by supporting or being opposed to the outcome.
Often times people look at the journey but not the final destination. Perhaps Moschen is a person easily influenced or extremely judgmental and doesn’t like to know extra information because it will cause him to think negatively or give excess praise to something that doesn’t deserve that treatment. Is this right for you? Well I guess it depends on your personality.