Question:
Question about Occam's Razor?
2012-05-23 12:53:45 UTC
Should Occam's Razor be renamed 'Cut the Bullshit'?
Ten answers:
read Proud Kweer Gringo Kaffir
2012-05-23 13:01:55 UTC
Let's see:



Occam's Razor, if I'm correct, says that we should choose the explanation that has the fewest chances of being wrong. So...



Explanation A:

thing 1 happened then

thing 2 happened then

thing 3 happened then

thing 4 happened then

thing 5 happened then

thing 6 happened then

thing 7 happened.



None of which is very well supported by anything other than stubborn insistence and rationalization.



Explanation B:

thing 1 happened (supported by evidence. Seems plausible.) then

thing 2 happened (also supported by evidence. Seems plausible.) then

thing 3 happened. Then end.



Yeah, Explanation A is full of bullshit.



How did you get 'bullshit' to post? I wonder if it will work for me.
?
2012-05-23 15:10:47 UTC
Occam's Razor = All things being equal, a simple explanation is better than a more complex one = this is the law of economy and is used in the Scientific Method, especially in physics.



I've never read on here any atheist ever even use the term 'Occam's Razor' - let alone call it bullplop!



Surely what you actually mean to slate is Pascal's Wager; which is continuously ridiculed by atheists here without ever providing a valid argument against it. Just as you're doing here now.



I think you've got just a teeny bit mixed up and confused in your keenness to splurge your bile tonight.
2012-05-23 13:02:43 UTC
Yes. And since Occam was a theist, we should accept the fact that (if we are honest) everyone knows that God exists. When so-called atheists finally do cut the bullshit then we can all agree that God exists and move on.





---------------------------------------------------



RE "Doug, Occam never applied his own idea to his beliefs, and this is perfectly common. Smart people through history have believed stupid things, and in Occam's day theism was basically the only option. I do not "know" that God exists, and find the idea, while not impossible, ludicrous and ridiculously unlikely. No religion has more than half the world's population believing in it"





Oh, I get it. Occam (a genius remembered from centuries past) was "stupid" and you are much smarter. I find it interesting that so many of the atheists think they are so amazingly intelligent when in reality they are average, everyday people who will die and soon be forgotten. Here's a wake up call- in 100 years no one will remember you. You are no where near as intelligent as Occam.
Corey
2012-05-23 13:08:28 UTC
The problem with Occam's razor is that people think that "shorter explanation" means the same thing as "simpler explanation".



So I think it's more instructive to summarize Occam's razor as "don't be so presumptuous" instead of the more vague, "cut the bull ****".



edit:

For some reason, the filter doesn't catch some cuss words in fairly common compound words. If you don't want to have some report monkey hitting you, then put in spaces, so it doesn't look like you're gaming the system. Or don't. It's not like those words are going to hurt anyone.
linsday
2016-10-02 02:48:01 UTC
nicely, "the finest is the superb" paraphrasing of Occam's Razor quite isn't that precise, for my section. The axiom, as interperted by skill of Bertrand Russel, states that in case you may clarify a phenomenon without assuming hypotheticals, then there is not any floor for assuming them. In different words, for 2 or greater motives seen on equivalent floor in words of their skill to describe the reported responses, one would desire to continually choose first for the reason in terms of the fewest achievable variety of motives, aspects, or variables. whilst/if those motives are eradicated, then bypass and think of related to the rest. in case you do desire to bypass with the "easiest answer is the superb" variety of interpretation, i'd extremely see it phrased "the finest answer is, all else being equivalent, the main probable". i'd use "probable" rather of "superb". This captures the common sentiment and skill that the reason being tentative and must be shown. once you're saying "the superb", it skill that the reason being absolute and no extra attention is due. you do no longer desire to furnish that effect, it is not very scientific :) So, in terms of world warming, one need no longer bypass any farther than naming greater CO2 emissions because of the fact the favourite clarification, which interior of reason trouble-free placed that way. in spite of the undeniable fact that, in international warming as in the different concept in technology, the greater you learn it, the greater complexity you demonstrate. this would not recommend Occam's razor stops using, because of the fact Occam's razor is meant to slice away the hypotheticals, no longer the quite info and concept based on that info.
Joe
2012-05-23 13:07:36 UTC
Doug, Occam never applied his own idea to his beliefs, and this is perfectly common. Smart people through history have believed stupid things, and in Occam's day theism was basically the only option. I do not "know" that God exists, and find the idea, while not impossible, ludicrous and ridiculously unlikely. No religion has more than half the world's population believing in it
PROBLEM
2012-05-23 12:56:46 UTC
one of my favorite quotes



William Occam was a priest. Kinda funny to have atheists following priests. Of course it's difficult to avoid seeing how almost all of Western science is built upon the foundations of science from the Catholic Church, mostly clerics at that.
?
2012-05-23 12:55:15 UTC
Whatever floats your boat.
Red
2012-05-23 12:55:40 UTC
I say we rename it to "I don't actually know how this argument works" because I am sick of hearing "Goddidit is SO much easier than science, so it must be true!"
joemoser1948
2012-05-23 12:55:33 UTC
No; it is quite different


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...