Faiq
- 347
- 16
In the last scene, Sherlock was tasked with picking a "good pill" or a "bad pill"? What ACTUALLY happened in that scenario and why did Sherlock picked the pill on the left?
Here is what I think:
This is in continuation to Jessica Barber's answer to this question
https://www.quora.com/Science-of-De...ock-pick-up-the-good-bottle-or-the-bad-bottle
So before reading this answer please read the answer in the above link.
Let's say this was the correct answer. So there is a possibility that Sherlock could've died. Then the question arises what Moriarty had to gain from the situation if Sherlock died? Does he want to lose such a brilliant arch-nemesis? And doesn't it sound a little cowardice that Moriarty is using someone else to defeat Sherlock and he doesn't have the guts to stand against Sherlock?
Remember the part in season 2 episode 3 where Moriarty teased Sherlock by saying," I knew you’d fall for it. That’s your weakness. You always want everything to be clever." How was Moriarty able to deduce that? From the 5 cases he threw over Sherlock? No, they were brilliantly planned and were in no way a reflection of Sherlock's weakness. Where did Moriarty get that idea then? I think this scenario was the time when it convinced Moriarty that Sherlock treats everything to be a complex case even when making a random choice like these two bottles.
In my opinion, from choosing left-handed victims to the Jeff's "move", these all were factors deliberately introduced, to see how much thinking Sherlock would apply in a simple game. This is when Moriarty realized that Sherlock want everything to be complex and clever.
Do you guys have any theory about that scenario? What do you think of my reasoning?
Let me know
Here is what I think:
This is in continuation to Jessica Barber's answer to this question
https://www.quora.com/Science-of-De...ock-pick-up-the-good-bottle-or-the-bad-bottle
So before reading this answer please read the answer in the above link.
Let's say this was the correct answer. So there is a possibility that Sherlock could've died. Then the question arises what Moriarty had to gain from the situation if Sherlock died? Does he want to lose such a brilliant arch-nemesis? And doesn't it sound a little cowardice that Moriarty is using someone else to defeat Sherlock and he doesn't have the guts to stand against Sherlock?
Remember the part in season 2 episode 3 where Moriarty teased Sherlock by saying," I knew you’d fall for it. That’s your weakness. You always want everything to be clever." How was Moriarty able to deduce that? From the 5 cases he threw over Sherlock? No, they were brilliantly planned and were in no way a reflection of Sherlock's weakness. Where did Moriarty get that idea then? I think this scenario was the time when it convinced Moriarty that Sherlock treats everything to be a complex case even when making a random choice like these two bottles.
In my opinion, from choosing left-handed victims to the Jeff's "move", these all were factors deliberately introduced, to see how much thinking Sherlock would apply in a simple game. This is when Moriarty realized that Sherlock want everything to be complex and clever.
Do you guys have any theory about that scenario? What do you think of my reasoning?
Let me know
