Welcome back to confirmation biases. Last time, I explained that to avoid confirmation bias, you'd have to view a perspective on both sides. If you haven't read it yet, I suggest you do.
So, what did I mean by viewing a perspective on both sides?

Well, simply put, I meant what I said. You find both proving and disproving evidence of a topic. Well, how do you do this?
Think of it this way - "Does this evidence give clear evidence that this might be right? If not, is there any counter evidence?"
If the answer to this is yes, congratulations - You've found sound evidence that does not confirm that your belief is 100% right. At the most, you've most likely only confirmed a very small portion of your claim.

If the answer to this is no, however, you then look for counter evidence. Counter evidence to see if your not-clear evidence is incorrect.
Let's use an example, again.

You're investigating a murder. You have solid evidence that the murderer is a 15-year old child from... I don't know, Kentucky. However, you know that this one piece of evidence doesn't confirm it, and therefore, look for counter-evidence.
Then, you do find counter-evidence. You find counter-evidence that they're not from Kentucky, and that they're actually from New Jersey. So, you put both of these aside and begin battling out which seems more likely.
If, however, you can't find a conclusion, then set them aside for later until you find more evidence/counter-evidence. Once you have enough, argue with yourself, then make your case.

This has been Week One of Logic Lessons with L, stay tuned for Week Two, which we'll be discussing about planning and unplanned executions of... anything.