First Report: Initial Observations

Our first few steps, when we were able to start observing the box, involved determining some of the physical characteristics of the box. We got a rough idea of the weight of the box, how the weight of the contents shifted, the sound of the contents shifting, and the overall feel of the box. In practicing these techniques, we were able to determine that there is more than one item in the box. There seems to be another box within the observable box, and further more small and hard pieces (most likely made of a metallic substance). In coming to an agreement of what types of things could be in the box, it seems that the group may start to have some disagreements. This can most easily be applied to the fact that both members have had different experiences and interactions with particular objects. This can lead to generalizing the sound of the small objects to be completely different things. It is important to keep all bias aside in order to develop the most logical theory and explanation.

The group is relying heavily on inductive practices so far. They are relating the sound, weight, and feel of the box with past observations in order to make the most sense of it. This could be a dangerous tactic, so they believe they must establish what levels of probability. These levels will help in determining what the possibilities of the box contents could be, and keeping the most logical answers in mind.

All of the observational tactics of the group seem to be building on each other in order to more refine the theory put forward. This is a prime example of a "Kuhnian Puzzle-Solving" technique. Using smaller details of an instance can help to refine generalities and add a newer, more beneficial level of description and understanding. They are using new-found knowledge in order to more accurately shape and build their theories. They realize that they must be careful in doing this, however. It is most imperative to use new knowledge to not only build on a current theory, but to determine if the present theory remains valid at all. This distinction can be made in placing relevance on the observations. In determining what data is most relevant to the overall task, the group is then able to see if this data supports the current theory, or calls for a theory refinement (or a new theory altogether).