Sequential Problem Solving | Page 6

and the task of thinking
about nothing begun anew. After ten or fifteen minutes, the train of
intrusive thoughts usually begins to slow down, and we can then take
the list of seemingly unrelated thoughts and sort out the ones that relate
to the problem. The next step of brainstorming is to take the free
association / stream of consciousness list and circle the words that
pertain to the problem, and connect them with "web" lines into
"clusters." These crude webs and clusters can then be reconstructed into
a more legible outline. (Several styles of outlining are illustrated in the
Appendix 2.) This outline can then be used in the subsequent steps of
problem solving. The subsequent steps of the problem solving
procedure involve hypothetico-deductive reasoning and is a part of the
scientific method.[4]
* * * * *
Problem Solving Steps.
1. Identify the problem (state the hypothesis).
2. Gather facts: three ways in the order of most reliability.
A. Research -- library, Internet.
B. Ask someone knowledgeable.
C. Brainstorm: free association / stream of consciousness, web and
cluster, outline.
3. Develop several alternative solutions.
4. Pick a possible solution and try it.
5. Evaluate the outcome.
6. Try again if necessary

* * * * *
Problem Identification as the first step of problem solving
In life, personal problems are often complicated by outside challenges.
In literature, these forces are called external conflicts. The external
conflict may be man challenged by nature, man embattled by society,
or one man opposed by another man. In science, problems are often
exclusively matters of a physical nature and the external conflict is man
being challenged by nature.
Internal conflicts have a personal nature. By comparing personal
internal conflicts to Aristotle's structure for dramas, these conflicts can
often be recognized. Aristotle's drama structure divided the play into
five acts with a hero, a villain, an external conflict and climax, and an
emotional cleansing involving an internal conflict. Real life internal
conflicts often involve character traits and values that are easily
identified by this method.[5] (Character traits and values are discussed
in the section on interpersonal relationships.)
* * * * *
Fact Gathering in Problem Solving.
The preferred order for gather facts is based on the order of reliability:
library research, asking someone knowledgeable, and brainstorming.
Facts should be tested for logic, emotional fallacies, and the credibility
of "expert" witnesses. Facts gained from research in a library are
easiest to verify, and other methods of gathering facts must often be
re-verified through library research. Logical and emotional weaknesses
of arguments can often be recognized by the use of certain fallacy
recognition checklists.[6] The most widely used of the fallacies is the
over or under generalization: everyone (all, without exception, none,
never, no one) rode a bicycle when only two years old.[7]
* * * * *

The more common persuasive fallacies are:
Logic Fallacies.
1. Generalization -- It is raining everywhere. It has not rained anywhere.
(The exception is discounted.)
2. Circular argument -- That team is the best because it is the greatest.
(Similar adjectives describing each other.)
3. Either or fallacy -- Either the city will drill more wells or it will run
out of water. (This ignores the possibility of water pipelines, river dams,
desalinization, etc.)
4. Cause and effect fallacies -- two kinds:
A. Single cause fallacy -- The streets are wet, therefore it has been
snowing. (This discounts other causes like rain.)
B. Guilt by association -- He has a friend that is a Japanese, therefore
he must be Japanese in his soul.
* * * * *
Emotional Fallacies. (These are intended make a person fear loss of
friendship.)[8]
1. Generalization-Everyone is doing it.
2. Snob Appeal -- A special thing for a special group: Heroes wear only
Hot Stuff clothes.
3. Loaded Language -- Emotionally connotative terms of derision: He
is a "Mutt." (Not only a dog but also a worthless cur.)
4. Name Calling -- This is often used to discredit someone. It is also
often a problem evasion rather than a problem solving strategy that
uses:

i. Sarcasm.
ii. Cynicism.
* * * * *
Credibility Fallacies.
Credibility fallacies are those in which uncertified people present
themselves as experts: the famous actor dressed as a doctor
recommending a certain medicine. The actor is not a trained
professional and has no professional credibility.
Fact And Opinion.
Certain keywords can be often be used to differentiate facts from
opinions.
1. Generalizations. All inclusive or all exclusive terms that usually have
exceptions: everyone, everything, no one, never, always:
It always rains in the summertime. (This does not take into account
long droughts or geographic locations where rain rarely falls.)
Everyone drives a Ford.
2. Statements about the future:
We will never go there.
3. Statements of opinion:
It seems