The first step in reasoning is to objectively assess the situation. Detachment is key. The one engaging in it has to analyze the situation somewhat ruthlessly for any possible item, and every possible entity, that could be useful toward the end. Reasoning is teleological, sighted toward an end. It's important to stress the level of objectivity and detachment the one engaging in reasoning must exercise: they must view the situation totally impartially, as if from a bird's eye perspective, where every actor, entity, and outcome is viewed without subjective weight, without giving non-factual weight to any part of it. That can be a very difficult process, especially when the matter at hand is grand or important, which when reasoning it often invariably is, but it is necessary to facilitate the best process, equally invariably.

Because reasoning is a process that is aligned only with an end, the end must be firmly fixed in mind. It is toward this end that all objective analysis must be grounded against. The situation needs to be analyzed not for arbitrary values, but all possible values that could bring about that end. There is a subjective process to reasoning, but it comes later. The first step is an impartial analysis of all objects and entities.

Observe and record everything that could be useful. Commit it to memory. Store the connections between these entities. Detachment is key when doing this because objects and entities often have strange or unpredictable pattern sequences that connect them together, but these cannot be properly observed or utilized without engaging a method of observation that is independent from what can be understood when immersed in a situation from the perspective of an entity in it. The analysis must be viewed from the pattern of an entity outside it. It is actually like viewing something from within chaos, as opposed to watching it from a drone.

The observations and formulations made at this step must be grounded in something, moreover, and these associations must be made clear and themselves analyzed. An entity might be considered to be useful toward an end, but what gives the one reasoning the idea that it is so useful? Is that which gives it weight a reliable entity itself? Where does it arise from? Has it immersed itself in an actual situation that resembles this one, or is it derived from the common conclusions of many such situations? If not, then it is not to be used to derive any consideration.

Now, depending on the importance or personal connection to the situation, this objective analysis is sometimes very simple. At other times, it is an involved process, and emotions or other factors can interfere. It is important to assess how closely one can disentangle their emotions from the situation, and factor that into the analysis of the usefulness and category of entities. In general, one should completely detach from the situation, with no subjective grounding whatsoever during this analysis period. But there are some circumstances where that is not possible, and things like grand emotional connections can disrupt normal patterns; note it, and factor that into the analysis. It is best to prevent it. The skillful use of grounding subjective weight into the initial detached analysis is a very complex maneuver; although it is an incredibly useful one when when deployed properly. When uncertain, and as a general rule, complete detachment is superior.

Reasoning is almost always a process done under novelty, and a question arises when reacting to the notion that all things must be considered against the backdrop of that which can be reliably substantiated, so as to not will one into a delusion that might be harshly overwritten when engaging in the product of what willful reasoning should lead to. How can all items be considered with substantiated things when dealing with novel situations where ideas haven't had the opportunity to be substantiated? The fact that the one engaging in reasoning should have noted patterns between seemingly disparate ideas is important. That should allow them to spot novel connections adapted for the situation, themselves being tailored for things different, but the common link among them being substantiated when realized here. The fruition of a substantiated pattern among disparate items is a process that comes solely from objective analysis.