The book The Hound of the Baskervilles, written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, is a book about a mysterious case that had happened. In this novel, the two main detectives, Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson, have two different thinking systems. Both of them cooperate together to solve the final mystery. However, Holmes' thinking has outmatched Watson’s thinking since Holmes can collect enough evidence and come up with a final solution. Now I am going to present three ways how Watson’s thinking is not advanced.

First, Watson is too fast to come up with a solution or a connection between the only few scarce pieces of evidence. In chapter 1 about the stick that someone had left out in Holmes’ office, Watson gave his opinion about the proprietor of the stick. Watson’s elucidation of the stick is that it belongs to a person who walks a lot and the stick belongs to a doctor. However, he was too quick because he saw the letters on the stick and was delighted that he found evidence. Therefore, he made the conclusion. On the other hand, Holmes took over the stick and overhauled it and had a totally different perspective and explanation of the stick. Holmes deciphered that the stick’s owner is called Dr. Mortimer and he has a dog due the marks on the stick. As we can see, Watson is too fast at examining specimens and took nimble at coming up with a solution. Unlike Holmes, he took way longer to see all the evidence on the stick and therefore successfully got the right answer. Watson is not dumb, is just that he is not patient.

Second, Watson’s thinking isn’t that good compared to Holmes is that he is too naive at everything others told him and trust every evidence that he found. In the last chapter, I talked about how evidence can help you to get a conclusion. However, not every evidence is true and relevant to the case. In The Hound of the Baskervilles chapters 8-10 are about the final killer, Stapleton. Watson assumed that he is a good person since he told many things about the hound and provided evidence (fake) to Watson. In contrast, Watson trusted Stapleton and treat him as his confidant. From this event, we can clearly see how Watson is too innocent and trusts everything people say. Another typical example will be when Sir Henry and Dr. Mortimer had finished their lunch and were leaving, a taxi was secretly following Sir Henry. Holmes and Watson immediately noticed it and kept track of the person in the taxi. The person realized he was being followed and ran away. Watson remembers that the person has a beard—however, the beard could be fake and Watson did not realize that and counted that as evidence. Unlike Watson, Holmes was nimble and tracked down the taxi number, which proves his skill in solving cases.

Third, Watson can’t observe the things around him that seems to be not relevant to the case. In the last few chapters of the book, when Holmes and Watson were in the Baskerville hall, Holmes realized that there is a family portrait of the Baskerville family. Holmes also ascertained that one of the people in the picture is Stapleton. Holmes then uses this evidence to prove that Stapleton has an impulse of killing Sir Henry and getting the inheritance. Another example is how Watson mistakenly interprets some of the evidence. In the last few chapters, we know that Beryl is actually Ms. Stapleton. However, when Beryl introduced herself, we actually thought she is just Stapleton’s sister. Watson was innocent and therefore trusted her. However, if we look at Holmes, when he was secretly tracking these things, found out that they are a couple. AS you can see, Watson is too stupid and trusts everything people say.

Holmes thinking and Watson’s thinking are very divergent since Holmes is tracking down everything around him. Watson, however, tries to get two evidence together and form a conclusion.