Speculation re: Yet ANOTHER Character: Amuro Tooru

[Feb914]

In the newly released manga chapter (798), we can see that he asked Ran and Kogoro about their password. He also heard about Professor Agasa and his inventions. Don't forget that he's also interested on meeting Sera. Seems that this person IS related to BO, especially Bourbon.

[mangaluva]

Oooh, are all three of our Random Mystery People going to meet? I want them all to see each other for the first time at the same moment, and for all of them to instantly whip out guns and knives and bombs and be in a three-way standoff while Kogoro and Ran just stand there like "bwuh?" and Ai gibbers in a corner.

[someone somewhere]

In the newly released manga chapter (798), we can see that he asked Ran and Kogoro about their password. He also heard about Professor Agasa and his inventions. Don't forget that he's also interested on meeting Sera. Seems that this person IS related to BO, especially Bourbon.

I was wondering the same thing. Seriously, no stupid people will tell a stranger they met a few days ago their passwords… It would have been reasonable to just answer with a general remark like "a wordplay on the name" or "their birthday" rather than giving Amuro their passwords straightaway…

On another note, this means that things are getting interesting. I am very sure that the password issue will crop up again later as Amuro (assuming he is bourbon) is certainly going to make a good use of the information~

[D.]

I'm more interested in seeing his reaction towards Sera and Haibara than what he will do with Ranand Kogoro's passwords.

[Feb914]

following the password thing, he guided Kogoro to find location of password, same with what Conan usually do. Doesn't it mean that Amuro know about how stupid Kogoro actually is, and how Conan is the one behind everything?

[Kaito Lady]

Chekhov's theories are generally the most logical and realistic. I'm with Chekhov on this one.

ALTERNATE CRACK THEORY: He's Goro.

Fixed

+1

[D.]

following the password thing, he guided Kogoro to find location of password, same with what Conan usually do. Doesn't it mean that Amuro know about how stupid Kogoro actually is, and how Conan is the one behind everything?

Judging from what he said to Ran, I think he hasn't yet made the connection. But I think he soon will since esukei( I guess the spelling is wrong ) had made it and obviously Amuro is way more smarter.

[Tenken]

He will find out Conan = Shinichi very soon.

[Chekhov MacGuffin]

He will find out Conan = Shinichi very soon.

If he does, if he is loyal he'll have to die or really get amnesia. That would be kind of ironic after the Scar Akai thing.

[sstimson]

I going to have a little fun and show Logical Fallacies in Chekhov statements

I am using this site Logical Fallacies as a starting point

1) Amuro is a detective and very skilled at intelligence gathering

And because of this Chekhov say Amuro is bourbon

But lets look at the exact words that Kir told Jodie

Spoiler:

"This person is skilled at inspection and information gathering, and has keen insight!"

A detective does have these, but that does not make that person a detective

This kind of logical fallacy is called: Confusing association with causation

This is similar to the post-hoc fallacy in that it assumes cause and effect for two variables simply because they occur together. This fallacy is often used to give a statistical correlation a causal interpretation. For example, during the 1990’s both religious attendance and illegal drug use have been on the rise. It would be a fallacy to conclude that therefore, religious attendance causes illegal drug use. It is also possible that drug use leads to an increase in religious attendance, or that both drug use and religious attendance are increased by a third variable, such as an increase in societal unrest. It is also possible that both variables are independent of one another, and it is mere coincidence that they are both increasing at the same time.

2) He has a type of personality Gin would not like.

Do we know what kind of personality Gin likes? But Chekhov must

This logicial fallacy is Argument from authority
The basic structure of such arguments is as follows: Professor X believes A, Professor X speaks from authority, therefore A is true. Often this argument is implied by emphasizing the many years of experience, or the formal degrees held by the individual making a specific claim. The converse of this argument is sometimes used, that someone does not possess authority, and therefore their claims must be false. (This may also be considered an ad-hominen logical fallacy – see below.)

In practice this can be a complex logical fallacy to deal with. It is legitimate to consider the training and experience of an individual when examining their assessment of a particular claim. Also, a consensus of scientific opinion does carry some legitimate authority. But it is still possible for highly educated individuals, and a broad consensus to be wrong – speaking from authority does not make a claim true.

This logical fallacy crops up in more subtle ways also. For example, UFO proponents have argued that UFO sightings by airline pilots should be given special weight because pilots are trained observers, are reliable characters, and are trained not to panic in emergencies. In essence, they are arguing that we should trust the pilot’s authority as an eye witness.

There are many subtypes of the argument from authority, essentially referring to the implied source of authority. A common example is the argument ad populum – a belief must be true because it is popular, essentially assuming the authority of the masses. Another example is the argument from antiquity – a belief has been around for a long time and therefore must be true.

3) When Amuro offers Kogoro an unknown "tuition" per case Kogoro brings him on, the amount he offers is enough to get Kogoro excited and accept Amuro as an apprentice without hesitation

Just because this happens does not make Bourbon rich

This Logical Fallacy is Non-Sequitur
In Latin this term translates to "doesn't follow". This refers to an argument in which the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the premises. In other words, a logical connection is implied where none exists.

4) Amuro has an interest in the Mouri Detective Agency shown by him taking a part time job at the Poirot and asking to be Kogoro's apprentice which means he will be able to access the agency and track Kogoro and Conan's movements with relative ease.

Another Non-Sequitur One thing does not necessarily mean the other

[Partsu]

wow...
you're really doing your all to beat Chekhov....
or should I say her Theories...

[MSUser]

Since I'm quite interested in such things related to logic, I looked briefly at your arguments.

To begin with: All of Chekhov's arguments are that support her theory that Scar Akai is Bourbon is Amuro are titled "Direct Evidence/Evidence", so they are not necessarily the full truth, but one can make the strong assumption that the theory is correct based on that evidence.
When criticising the theory, one should not confuse evidence with 100% proof.

1) Amuro is a detective and very skilled at intelligence gathering

And because of this Chekhov say Amuro is bourbon
A detective does have these, but that does not make that person a detective

This kind of logical fallacy is called: Confusing association with causation

The argument is: Amuro is a detective -- yes, he really is, and what we've seen from him is that he is skillful. And Bourbon has the skills a detective usually has. (Moreover, there are people who call others having those skills detectives, even when they really aren't). Since there aren't many characters around that might have a BO connection and have those features it is valid to take those features as an evidence for identifying the two and conclude that Amuro is Bourbon.

2) He has a type of personality Gin would not like.

Do we know what kind of personality Gin likes? But Chekhov must

If a person (Gin) says that another person is irritating, he means that his (present) attitude, character, or other properties are irritating. This means that a person (Gin) does not like the kind of personality another person has. This is not really logical reasoning, this is how you use language to describe people.

3) When Amuro offers Kogoro an unknown "tuition" per case Kogoro brings him on, the amount he offers is enough to get Kogoro excited and accept Amuro as an apprentice without hesitation

Just because this happens does not make Bourbon rich

Can you tell me where anybody explicitly wrote that Bourbon must be rich? The only thing which can safely be assumed (and, of course, is assumed by Chekhov) is, that Amuro, as a harmless employee or detective, is highly unlikely to earn that much that Kogoro will accept him as a student immediately. If he was rich, he wouldn't work as a waiter.
It seems as if there is some Non-sequitur on your side.

4) Amuro has an interest in the Mouri Detective Agency shown by him taking a part time job at the Poirot and asking to be Kogoro's apprentice which means he will be able to access the agency and track Kogoro and Conan's movements with relative ease.

You don't think that there is any interest on Amuro's side in the Agency? Isn't "working" as a Kogoro's apprentice enough evidence for his interest?
Amuro's actions are contradictory. He already has two jobs (waiter, detective). If he does both of them due to lack of enough income if he only does a single job, then he must be stupid to waste his money to Kogoro. If he earns a lot with those jobs, or he has made a large inheritance, then it is complete unnecessary to waste his time with Kogoro. Moreover, even Ran noticed that Amuro already has surpassed his master.

[D.]

But lets look at the exact words that Jodie told Conan

Spoiler:

Does this mean that if Conan senses something between Amuro, Okiya, and Haibara in file 799 we get to see them in 800?

[Feb914]

there is a very interesting debate here.

to be honest, Gosho has given a lot of red herring for Bourbon's identity. (assuming they are different people) There are 4 people who can be Bourbon:
Scar Akai
Amuro Tooru
Okiya Subaru
Sera

each of them has evidences to make readers infer they are the real Bourbon, but then again, some of them will be red herring.

that being said, it's true that this Amuro guy is very curious, he's very skilled as detective, seems richer than his life style, and have huge curiosity to Kogoro and Sera, which put him as "a significant character in Bourbon arc" and not just minor recurring character. To say more than is inference.

[MagicianUndertheMoonlight]

My thoughts are in agreement with those above that say Amuro is Bourbon. We know that Kir described Bourbon as a detective like Holmes. He appears to have enough of a similar build to Akai to have impersonated him during the red shirts department store bombing incident. It seems to me that Sera is suspicious of Amuro for this reason and wants to meet him (I'm siding with those who think Sera is Akai's sister).

In addition, something that Amuro said in the latest translated volume stuck with me. He described himself as brashly announcing his deduction in the dna incident, which reminded me a lot of how bourbon impatiently texted Kogorou the solution in the department store incident.

Plus we haven't seen how Ai has reacted around Amuro yet. My guess is Subaru is a part of this issue so that when Ai meets Amuro and reacts it would seem as if it is because Subaru is also there.