Judgement: Level-6 in Inquiry

Formulation

Judgements can be made in relation to any output at lower levels: and they must be made as part of personally committing to findings. Judgement is intrinsic to inquiry and naturally placed at Level-6. To be worth anything, judgements must be justified. Because of this justification, a sense of confidence and conviction develops—despite any blatant or inherent uncertainties.

A variety of common-sense and ad hoc justifications are possible in any particular case. However, it is now known that there are numerous unconscious cognitive biases that can skew judgement. These judgement biases are in addition to errors identified in the lower elements of inquiry.
Examples :

Biases include anchoring, availability, contrasts, priming, loss aversion, probability fallacies, groupthink, authority, convention, logical errors.

In philosophy, studying what counts as a proper justification of judgements is a part of epistemology. Professional scientists have a more practical focus and assess justification in regard to the methods used. Circumstances and objects of study naturally affect what methods are feasible.

Scientists study methodology because they feel an obligation for their judgements to come with the best possible guarantee of truth. Paradigmatic research methods based in epistemologically-sound principles form the Principal Typology nested within PH2L6. These research methods (PH'2) tell scientists how they are to approach the real world and what levels in inquiry-PH2 are to be given particular significance (primacy). See details in the next section.

Name Revision:

In the published work this level was named testing. However, the present view is that testing is simply one method for justifying judgement. In many situations, a test is not required or is impossible. But a judgement is always required e.g. the claim that the average annual road accident rate in a town has been 1/10,000 cannot be tested experimentally. However, the claim does need to be judged and that judgement must be justified. A scientist using the figure in a study is likely to apply stricter criteria than a tourist.

Function: To calibrate conviction in specific knowledge claims.

Mechanism: Use research principles to justify judgements.

Cumulation: Judgements explain the basis for certainty not just for posited relations, but in regard to claims using any lower level inquiry element.

Features

Uncertainty Puzzle: Is it true?
A judgement may be made and it may be justified carefully or cleverly. But confidence in the validity of the results of inquiry is still not guaranteed. Uncertainty remains.

Inherent Error: Limitations of the judging process or method.
For a non-scientist, judgements are typically made in a habitual way or via thoughtfulness or intuition. As noted above, this brings numerous biases and fallacies into play. Research methods help, but none are perfect.

Scientists usually become committed to a preferred research method and develop expertise in its use. That method is a doctrine and its inherent limitations get downplayed.

Use of Numbers: No new numerical method emerges here, but statistics play a major role when probabilities are relevant to judging. However, the misapplication of statistics is widespread and natural. Modern statistics emerged in the late 19^th Century, soon generating the phrase: "Lies, damned lies and statistics."

Locus of Control: External-social-objective
Judgement assumes the effort to become objective. As the judgement is assumed or made explicit in communications about an inquiry, some social control is expected. In science, control is provided by the socially sanctioned method, whose use is typically subject to scrutiny. In other situations, control may be provided by a consensus (e.g. in a jury trial or a focus group) or multiple judges (e.g. in an audit committee or talent quest).

Relation to the Purpose Domain

Judgement involves purpose-RL6 because it is always necessary to use rules and values (criteria) when reaching and justifying a judgement. The term decision is often used when judgement is meant e.g. the "decision" of a judge.

Judgement-L6 governs the whole Inquiry hierarchy and provides it with whatever value there is or can be in the research process.

Many elements in our psychosocial world affect our Judgements-L6, including precisely what, how, why, when, where, and with whom. But that takes us outside the sphere of Inquiry itself.

---

Judgement assumes there is something to judge. But no element/level to this point has created any stimulus or energy for inquiry.

• To provide for this necessity, we must move up to the next and highest level: wonder-L7.

---

Originally posted: 23-Aug-2015. Last amended: 31-Oct-2026.