Posted by Marcus on May 01, 1999 at 13:28:54:
In Reply to: Re: Meeting GOD via the enneagram -Poster posing as GOD.... posted by Tal on May 01, 1999 at 04:50:37:
> > >
> > > >Ockham's Razor--principle stated by Mathematican/philosopher Ockham that >when confronted with two solutions to the same problem, the simpler is >probably correct (think of how Nature works: balls, for isntance, fall straight down in a vacuum, they don't zig zag;
> > > NATURE ALWAYS TAKES THE SIMPLEST COURSE).
> > > "NEVER SAY ALWAYS" [GOD]
> >
> > Poster posing as GOD,
> > Since you are not God, then Occam's Razor remains firm.
> > Thanks for the humor, though. :)
> > To Life!
> > MArcus
> The key word with regards to Ockham's razor is 'probability'... Ockham's Razor is just a theory that states it's highly *likely* that the simplest explanation reflects reality... Actually, Ockham never stated even that much--he merely said that it was good to simplify things. Even with more modern interpretations though, there are many, many exceptions in nature. The point is not that nature always works in the simplest way (it doesn't; there are many ways in which you can conceive of things being simpler), it's only that given two examples which explain the facts equally well, the simpler is likely to be better. But the simpler argument, though it may explain the facts, is often summarily batted down in favour of a more difficult one, so let the buyer beware. (Of course, it's possible to say: "well the simple argument is proved incorrect because more information is introduced which means the simpler theory no longer explains the facts in any case". But the problem with this argument is that if you take this line than you're asserting that since there can only be one truth, the inevitable and eventual explanation will be neither simpler nor more complex than any other but simply the only true one, which obviously does nothing to further the validity of Ockham's Razor.)
Tal,
I believe I reffered to "probability" in my definition of O's R.when I used the word "probably".
As for Nature always taking the simplest route, yes it does. It doesn't matter if WE can CONCEIVE of a simpler route;the only reason Nature dis not take a route we consider simpler than the one chosen is either becasue it couldn't due to natual laws or becasue there is a factor(s) involved that made the course easier though to our eyes it looks more complicated.
To Life!
Marcus