Occam’s razor: the forgotten key to science litera cy...

F

Fred Bloggs

Guest
Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/
 
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
<bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/
Click to expand...

Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.
 
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 12:27:39 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/
Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.
Click to expand...

LOL- like Newton was lazy too...
 
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 12:27:39 PM UTC-4, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/
Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.
Click to expand...

Didn\'t he have a long beard, as well? :)
 
On Tuesday, July 18, 2023 at 9:27:39 AM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/
Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.
Click to expand...

But, we don\'t just use the razor; we ask for consistency with observation. Detailed
observations in nature are all it takes to complicate an explanation, and no
principle of Occam makes such complications vanish.

Occam\'s razor, recently, makes the lab-leak hypothesis for COVID19 untenable.
 
On 7/18/2023 19:27, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/

Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. If a complex question cannot be split into a finite number
of questions answerable in a single bit each, we just cannot answer
the question.
But if it can, may be Occam\'s razor is applicable to each single
bit question. Or not, I don\'t think this is an easy one.
Him being lazy or not has little to do with his razor anyway...
 
On Tuesday, 18 July 2023 at 19:02:21 UTC+1, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
On 7/18/2023 19:27, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/

Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.

Hmmm. If a complex question cannot be split into a finite number
of questions answerable in a single bit each, we just cannot answer
the question.
But if it can, may be Occam\'s razor is applicable to each single
bit question. Or not, I don\'t think this is an easy one.
Him being lazy or not has little to do with his razor anyway...
Click to expand...

This is where he was (probably) born:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ockham,_Surrey
John
 
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 11:56:57 -0700 (PDT), John Walliker
<jrwalliker@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 18 July 2023 at 19:02:21 UTC+1, Dimiter_Popoff wrote:
On 7/18/2023 19:27, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2023 07:52:37 -0700 (PDT), Fred Bloggs
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com> wrote:

Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/

Some things in nature are extraordinarily complex, and Occams Razor
can lead to explanations that are very wrong. Occam was lazy.

Hmmm. If a complex question cannot be split into a finite number
of questions answerable in a single bit each, we just cannot answer
the question.
But if it can, may be Occam\'s razor is applicable to each single
bit question. Or not, I don\'t think this is an easy one.
Him being lazy or not has little to do with his razor anyway...

This is where he was (probably) born:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ockham,_Surrey
John
Click to expand...

I can think of a great name for the barber shop.
 
On 7/18/2023 10:02 AM, whit3rd wrote:
But, we don\'t just use the razor; we ask for consistency with observation. Detailed
observations in nature are all it takes to complicate an explanation, and no
principle of Occam makes such complications vanish.

Occam\'s razor, recently, makes the lab-leak hypothesis for COVID19 untenable.
Click to expand...

Occam says to minimize those things that your explanation requires
to be ASSUMPTIONS. It doesn\'t require all explanations to be *simple*.
If you look at the \"machinery\" of photosynthesis, it\'s far from \"simple\".
But, there are no \"insert something magical, here\" boxes in the process!

I.e., a Rube Goldberg mechanism has definable steps between input
and action -- none are \"black boxes\" that one has to take on faith
or postpone until the technology/understanding improves.
 
On 7/18/2023 4:37 PM, Don Y wrote:
On 7/18/2023 10:02 AM, whit3rd wrote:
But, we don\'t just use the razor; we ask for consistency with observation.
Detailed
observations in nature are all it takes to complicate an explanation, and no
principle of Occam makes such complications vanish.

Occam\'s razor, recently, makes the lab-leak hypothesis for COVID19 untenable.

Occam says to minimize those things that your explanation requires
to be ASSUMPTIONS.  It doesn\'t require all explanations to be *simple*.
If you look at the \"machinery\" of photosynthesis, it\'s far from \"simple\".
But, there are no \"insert something magical, here\" boxes in the process!

I.e., a Rube Goldberg mechanism has definable steps between input
and action -- none are \"black boxes\" that one has to take on faith
or postpone until the technology/understanding improves.
Click to expand...

E.g., life on earth is the result of aliens seeding the planet
(or, some imaginary \"gawd\") is a much simpler explanation than
an evolutionary process that factored random events into our
biochemistry.

But, the \"external actor\" requires an assumption that can\'t be proven.
 
On 19-July-23 12:52 am, Fred Bloggs wrote:
Didn\'t even give mention to the \'universe is a simulation\' from the C-grade economics undergrad...

https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/occams-razor-science-literacy/
Click to expand...

Occam\'s razor is about avoiding needless complication in an explanation.
The operative word here is \"needless\". Occam doesn\'t say that the
simplest explanation is the correct one even if it is not actually an
explanation.

Sylvia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top