Why convinient reasoning isn’t insight generation
An insight is:
- New information
- Causes action
- Profit results
With that piece of jargon unpacked, the next one is ‘convenient reasoning’.
Convenient reasoning is:
- An existing heuristic, hunch, feeling, belief, or instinct
- The seeking of validation or evidence
- Evidence to the contrary or modifying the position will be rejected
Convenient reasoning differs from a hypothesis. A hypothesis is rejected if it’s proven wrong.
No amount of evidence to the contrary will ever deter a convenient reasoner.
Building cases in support of a project, plan, or prospect is an incredibly important skill. Rallying persuasive evidence is a key part of that. A whole industry was built around the provision of convenient facts.
It’s an essential skill.
Perhaps there would be fewer disasters if, during the research portion of building a case, evidence – if it’s a valid insight – could actually alter the case being mad for the better.
The difference would be research for the sake of supporting a supposition, and genuine insight generation.