Equality and Occams Razor...

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ CREOnline News Group ]

Posted by J. Clifton on October 20, 2001 at 18:38:25:

In Reply to: Occams Razor... posted by JHyre in Ohio on October 19, 2001 at 21:03:49:

I think you need to emphasize the "equality" qualifier more. Occam's Razor, or parsimony, is the postulate that one should take the simplest explanation as the most likely, other things being equal. The razor acts as a kind of 'tiebreaker' in choosing between views of roughly equal validity. Again, all else being EQUAL, the simplest solution is most likely the correct solution. If the theories or parameters being compared are NOT equal, it is inappropriate to invoke the principle, as simplicity is NOT the way to decide the correctness of qualitatively or categorically different things. The razor is a special case tool, not a general case tool to determine truth.

Is classical physics "probably right" vs. relativity, or arithmetic "probably better" compared to calculus, because it's simpler? Nonsense questions, because the things being compared aren't equal. Neither is invoking the razor to compare L/O to PACTrust, when BOTH sides claim the two are not equal (Gatten specifically argues PACTrust is qualitatively superior to other schemes, and you and Bronchick are specifically claiming it is legally inferior to other devices). Neither side assumes the two theories are equal from the get go, so we can't utilize Occam to sort this out. You can't invoke a principle whose use requires the presumption of apparent equality for both views at the outset, to prove one side is MORE valid than the other, if you also believe they were NOT equal to begin with.

Follow Ups:


Post a Followup

NO POST 

Name    : 
E-Mail  : 
Subject : 

Comments:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ CREOnline News Group ]

WWWBoard 2.0a and WWWAdmin 2.0a © 1997, All Rights Reserved.
Matt Wright and DBasics Software Company