Occam's Razor?

Question

When I look at the world around me. I see lots of things that are redundant and unnecessary.
When it comes to mathematical models for predicting results, well I agree, the simpler the better.
But when it comes to theories that are trying to describe actual reality, getting rid of 'unnecessary bits' must be a mistake.

I'm a psychotherapist not a philosopher.
I guess my focus is more on what is real rather than on theory.
Is philosophy about making 'working models' or is it about trying to figure out what is truth?
I don't know, you tell me?

Are simpler solutions truer?

Not sure if reality itself is subjective?
Though I'm sure our perception of it is.
If I'm trying to describe objective reality, my best description would have the same amount of complexity as objective reality.

But it is probably a hopless task!!

Maybe simpler is better!!

Grey Raven-
Very good!

Answer 1

Occam's Razor is not a test for truth, as some seem to believe. It is instead a logical tool for determining the course of scientific investigation.

Simply put, the Razor states: "Other things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the best." Most misunderstanding of the Razor come from omitting "other things being equal" and substituting "best" with "true".

Occam postulated the Razor from an observation of scientific knowledge already accepted as true. Thus, he was looking at the simplest and best explanations of real phenomena in the formulation his process.

Occam's Razor is best used in science to pare down complex issues or to compare competing theories in order to determine an orderly test procedure.

The very fact that science tests and verifies one simple truth at a time seems to imbue Occam's Razor with magic, mystical and predictive values. This is true only to the unwashed and uneducated masses.

Occam's Razor might be useful on a limited scale in psychotherapy, but the "other things being equal" part would be rather daunting to account for.

Answer 2

There is no difference between maths and theory.

Ockham's razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. The principle is often expressed in Latin as the lex parsimoniae "law of parsimony"

entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, = entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity.

Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication in mathmatics - It is the first requirement of a theory that it works, that its predictions are correct and it has not been falsified. Occam's razor is used to adjudicate between theories that have already passed these tests, and which are moreover equally well-supported by the evidence.

But I can see where you are comming from - reality is so subjective. How can you apply your theory to anothers perception of reality. There is also Crabtree's Bludgeon, which takes a cynical view that 'No set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated.'

The simpist expination to reality is a God, you blame it all on some super being, and that answers all your questions with a simple answer. I may prefere however a more complex and less religious view.

The answer I currently hold may be simple, but it is also subjective. I would not have got to my present grasp of reality without a simplified model to build from. Sometimes it helps to think of ideas in the simplist terms, whilst you take in more information. When you remove the excess info, it sometimes makes a theory easier to understand.

Who knows we may find a mathmatical model to explain the universe in time?

Answer 3

Philosophy is a navigational tool for life!

Regardless of the beliefs and philosophies of others, if we have no philosophical outlook on life, we are as a ship without a rudder in the storms of our existence.


Models are fine for predicting things, but fall short of the mark after the event, when nothing has gone quite to plan as per model. This is where philosophy kicks in - how do we handle adversity and victory otherwise.

Rudyard Kipling answered this one, philosophically: "Look both impostors in the eye"!

Answer 4

properly, "the least perplexing is the terrific" paraphrasing of Occam's Razor fairly isn't that precise, in my view. The axiom, as interperted by potential of Bertrand Russel, states that if one can clarify a phenomenon devoid of assuming hypotheticals, then there is not any floor for assuming them. In different words, for 2 or greater motives considered on equivalent floor in words of their potential to describe the talked approximately responses, one ought to consistently choose first for the reason in terms of the fewest attainable style of motives, aspects, or variables. while/if those motives are eradicated, then pass and picture relating to the rest. in case you do desire to pass with the "least perplexing answer is the terrific" form of interpretation, i could fairly see it phrased "the least perplexing answer is, all else being equivalent, the main probably". i could use "probably" rather of "terrific". This captures the consumer-friendly sentiment and potential that the reason being tentative and ought to be shown. once you're saying "the terrific", it potential that the reason being absolute and no greater desirable attention is due. you do no longer desire to grant that impact, it is not scientific :) So, in terms of international warming, one need no longer pass any farther than naming greater desirable CO2 emissions because of the fact the common clarification, which interior reason elementary positioned that way. although, in international warming as in the different theory in technology, the greater you learn it, the greater complexity you demonstrate. this does not propose Occam's razor stops making use of, because of the fact Occam's razor is meant to slice away the hypotheticals, no longer the easily data and theory in keeping with that data.

Answer 5

I don't understand why you think getting rid of the unnecessary bits is a mistake...the whole point that was being made was that all things being equal getting rid of the things which made no difference made the solution simpler..thats the whole point...if its unnecessary, ignore it.

Answer 6

In most cases it easier to get rid of the unnecessary non-essentials in order to fully understand the theory, or philosophy.
If we state the specific basics instead of adding detail after detail it is easier to come up with factual evidence, instead of theory.

Answer 7

I always understood Occam's Razor to mean that if there are twenty possibilities for the reason (say) that such and such is happening ...that the most obvious reason....is the answer?
Am I wrong have I misunderstood this if so I must apologise to my husband!

Answer 8

I don't think Occam's Razor can be the solution of each and every problem, it's merely a theory that has proven to be right on numerous times.

Answer 9

I believe if you're going to take a leap in logical thinking, or of faith, make it as generic as possible. Dogma is generally necessarily wrong, philosophically or otherwise. In my opinion, of course.