After the objective analysis is complete, enter phase two of the reasoning process. This is where a very stringent, extremely controlled utilization of certain subjective tools should be implemented, but still heavily under the control of objective analysis. The ability of careful reasoning to handle novel situations is triumphant; however, its biggest weaknesses is precisely the fact that it deals with novelty by reasoning about it using products that are themselves novel. It is therefore susceptible to taking certain leaps that should not have been taken, or finding patterns that were not present in the original data, commonly derived or not. A very clever use of subjective weight and heuristics can counter this. One needs to be careful to keep it under the deliberate control of objective weighting so as to not reap the opposite weakness of deriving conclusions from data that fails to adapt.

Does the conclusion feel like it is proper? Does it align with the intended end? Does it capture the gravity of the situation? There may be emotions at play, and quite often these emotions can, utilized carefully, demonstrate immense utility. Do they, when articulated carefully to them, satiate the wishes of them? If not, perhaps reconsidering the entire conclusion might be correct. At minimum, one should understand why that is, or why not.

The subjective element is very important. Now that the importance of objectivity has been established, the subjective element can be given more attention. Reasoning is a process that heavily involves subjectivity. The objective analysis might be diluted by forming data that does not exist, reasoning objectively about things that cannot be done because there is no evidence to support it. Subjectivity bypasses this by giving data that is rapidly formed from existing pools of knowledge. The one engaging in the reasoning process must use subjectivity to make a decision. And it must be a crucial element.

Two crucial elements are the admission of uncertainty and the primacy of the objective. Roadblocks will occur during the execution of reasoning. Having a well-defined objective that the reasoner is confident they can achieve will assist them. The admission of uncertainty prevents leaps of dull faith.