Portrait of Pierre-Edouard Guerin Bioinformatician Data Scientist
Pierre-Edouard Guerin

Analytical Skill


Posted by Pierre-Edouard Guerin · 12 min read · Published on February 15, 2022

When I was in junior high school, I had the opportunity to take History and Geography classes from Nicolas Ben Fredj. He taught us the method ("the way" in greek) to compose and articulate our thoughts and knowledge. I recently watched a MOOC he recorded for Lycée français international Louis-Massignon. The ability to think analytically and to express ideas is useful. In science, whether in academia or industry, we need to compare different solutions or hypotheses objectively and communicate our analysis to our peers in order to make the best decisions.

great speakers

Speak One's Mind

Constructive argumentation is like composition in music. Often we don't like what we write or say because this is disappointing in regard of the prior efforts, the depth of knowledge we are presenting e.g. a difficult experiment, a thorough state of the art of a technology.

This disappointment often comes from a lack of method, and it leads us to fear any form of evaluation: reports, presentations, annual reviews and job interviews. Yet these trials should not be feared but rather seen as opportunities to show our skills, our mastery of knowledge and our ability to articulate information. Everyone should strive to master both knowledge (savoir) and know-how (savoir-faire). Confident in your method, then you have confidence in yourself. After all, an evaluation is meant to show your value. Here is the toolkit to craft any communications, whether it be a presentation, a report, or an interview.

Saying is not Speaking

To describe the world, nothing goes without saying. Things must be ordonned into a discourse to say the world. Yet saying is not the same as speaking. While both 'saying' and 'speaking' can be oral, 'saying' can also be written. Speaking is a natural ability slowly acquired through imprinting and mimicking. Saying is always about a set of rules, contrainsts or emphasized injonctions.

The world, like ourselves, is alive, and in its impatience creates more disorder than order. To describe and understand the world, we need to put a bit of order to it from time to time. The problem is that we tend to write the way we speak. Speaking gives the illusion of freedom. But this freedom is a mirage. Without order, we cannot articulate ideas and organize complex and technical information. Because the work is too diffult, the writing is limited: the content is approximate; the flow of ideas is disrupted.

Therefore, to put order in our knowledge is fundamental. It must be done whatever the field. You cannot leave the choice of words, their order, the sentence construction to hazard. Like a body, every element of your words must be articulated, assigned to a specific place, and given a specific role.

A place for everything, and everything in its place

This chiasm shows that in a sentence, the meaning of words matters as much as their order.

  1. To explain the idea to the reader
  2. To show the direction the reader have to follow

The way to say a thing change the intepretation. Some examples to understand:

PhrasingInterpretation
"The French team defeated England."Inaccurate as England is a country.
"The French team defeated the English team."Accurate.
"The French team defeated the English team on their home ground."Strenghten the merits of the winner.
"The French XV defeated the English XV."Outdated and wrong expression.
"The English team lost against the French team."Minimize the French victory.

There are infinite ways to phrase.

Depending on the phrasing, one says not the same thing from the same fact. Without even starting to convey an idea, the simple act of reporting a raw fact is enough to create a different reality.

An Opinion is not an Analysis

"Well, opinions are like assholes. Everybody has one."

Dirty Harry, The Dead Pool, 1988

Expressing an opinion is different from producing an analysis, because it is not about the content of the thought, but the self. In an opinion I think, the I takes precedence over the think.

Example:

"On Saturday, the French Team confirmed the growing strength and confidence of their play."

I goes beyond the fact to introduce an analysis.

On the contrary If I say:

"The French team dominated a bewildered English team on Saturday, their performance a testament to skill and confidence."

I introduce elements of evaluation and judgment that reveal my opinion.

All Generalizations are Dangerous, even this One

The main error is excessive generalization, which distorts the meaning of what is being said.

Example:

"There is a war in Ukraine."

The problem with this phrasing is that it creates a sense of normality. Like in There is a sea in Ukraine., indeed, the sea is here, was always here and will likely still be there in the future. Unlike the sea who is a constant, the war is a rupture. Saying there is denies the expectional nature of the event by treating it as an ordinary occurence.

Second Example:

"The war was triggered by either the Russians or the Ukrainians."

I am taking a side. The term trigger implies an aggressor.

Yet if I want to be factual:

"The Russian armies attacked Ukraine."

Here the difference is that I express a fact instead of an idea.

To summary, never use There is. In the world, everything is always the consequence of something else.

Do not essentialize

If I say:

"The Russian armies attacked Ukraine."

It is different from:

"The Russians attacked Ukraine."

I do a generalization. I am not saying true because not all the Russians attacked Ukraine. Most of the Russians are in their home in Russia. Some of the Russians are worry, some others are in opposition to this war. It is impossible to estimate their number but their existence is enough to do not say The Russians.

Minimize generalization and essentialization.

How to do an Analysis?

Deciphering Words

"Are the roots of words square?"

"— Square or cubic. It depends."

Eugene Ionesco, The Lesson, 1951

In any statement, you must identify key concepts by describing every components.

First Example of Analysis (History)

"The second world war, a total war?"

Scientifc question: In which way, the different wars in the second world war, totalitarisms, resistances, democraties, are complementary forms of the total war?

Second Example of Analysis (Geography)

"Seas and oceans: spaces at the heart of globalization?"

Scientifc question: In which ways, seas and oceans, two distinct but interconnected maritime areas, can be seen both as territories driving the mondialization and paradoxaly, as the main victims of its secondary effects?

Third Example of Analysis (Sociology)

How does the school shape individual life trajectories and contribute to the evolution of society?

Scientifc question: Can the educational institution, particularly in democracies, fulfill its dual objectives of individual self-realization and social equalization, as assigned by a democratic society committed to the values of progress?

Last Example of Analysis (Philosophy)

To discuss, is it to renounce violence?

Plan:

  1. Critics of the question itself as it states a "logical link" between discussion and violence.
  2. How can discussion regulate the violence inherent in all social and political relationships. Limits?
  3. On the contrary, instead of reducing violence, does the public expression of thought itself not become a source of violence?

Synthesis:

To discuss or to discuss?

Conclusion

To think a discourse is to deconstruct it in order to build one’s own discourse about the world. It is a double task: first unraveling, then reweaving what has been unraveled. This task requires method and culture.

Culture is made by learning, by acquisition of knowledge. This is not enough.

To acquire a useful culture e.i. a toolbox for analytical thinking, your knowledge must be challenged. By your curiosity which is never a flaw.

Question any new information. Is it useful? What does it teach you about the world?

Otherwise, a stored but not processed information is useless.

This tedious work at the beginning becomes playful once it turn into a reflex through practice. This is a game for one or more players. Engaging in discussion is never wasted time. Through discussion, the work of building culture occurs.

To go further

Nicolas Ben Fredj is a social science teacher in Lycée français international Louis-Massignon in Emirate of Abu Dhabi.

Music suggested to listen while reading this article

Rudolf Serkin plays Shubert

Rudolf Serkin, Franz Schubert, Adolf Busch, Hermann Busch

Piano Trio in E-Flat Major, D. 929 (Op.100) : II. Andante con moto. 1953 Sony Music Entertainment. YouTube Music

References





Published on February 15, 2022

Relevant Tags

About the Author

Portrait of Pierre-Edouard Guerin Bioinformatician Data Scientist
Pierre-Edouard Guerin
Bioinformatician

Latest Articles