Skip to main content
Philosophy

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

13
  • 2
    Although Occam himself was a theologian, so either he didn't apply the razor rule to the argument, or he applied it in a way different from yours.
    – Fabius Wiesner
    Commented Jul 3 at 13:09
  • 1
    @FabiusWiesner I didn't want to complicate a simple argument so I didn't add that tangent to my post but: In pre-historic times, imagining an animated nature is probably a very reasonable thing to do. With growing knowledge, Occam's razor led to monotheism (why would every well have its own fairy if He simply created all water and the laws that govern it!?). In Occam's time, a single creator was the best and simplest explanation with the fewest variables. (Paradoxically, it was the only thing he found necessary!). That has only changed with modern science. Occam was a genius -- in the 1300s.
    – Peter - Reinstate Monica
    Commented Jul 3 at 13:48
  • 1
    @Peter I am not very knowleadgeable, but assuming Wikipedia is well written and not biased, in the "Faith and reason" paragraph of William of Ockham page, he seemed to separate science (even science of 1300) from religion, very modern to my eyes (although I am probably biased), anyway centuries before others.
    – Fabius Wiesner
    Commented Jul 3 at 14:32
  • Er... I assume, from this post, that you don't like religion, but merely stating "Occam's Razor" isn't really an answer to... anything. I think this is a pretty low-effort answer. Occam's Razor isn't some philosophical axiom that you can invoke whenever something conflicts with your prior assumptions.
    – AmagicalFishy
    Commented Jul 3 at 16:52
  • 2
    @AmagicalFishy In my opinion, the level of thought exposed by the answer corresponds to the level of thought exposed by the question.-- Can you elaborate why and how you find the principle of Occam's razor arbitrary -- generally and specifically? I find it enormously helpful in general and cannot see here specifically how the idea to explain the workings of the world from (known) first principles is not superior to telling an extrinsic story on top.
    – Peter - Reinstate Monica
    Commented Jul 3 at 19:40