This is the second chapter of the series “Theories with a name”
It is a scientific and philosophical principle that proposes that, among hypotheses formulated on the same evidence, it is more rational to believe in the simplest one. That is: in the face of several explanations for a problem, the simplest tends to be the most correct. The English philosopher William of Occam (1285-1347) was not the first to preach this: Aristotle already did the same in the 4th century BC But it was Occam’s name that «stuck», because of the frequent use he made of the argument in philosophical debates. The term “razor” or “blade” is a metaphor that came much later: it suggests that, with the use of parsimony, the most complicated hypothesis is “cut”.
sharp vision
Let’s apply the concept to a situation where witnesses look up and see an unidentified flying object.
“Is it a plane?”
As the object approaches, the hypothesis gains different characteristics: planes fly high, are large and move at high speed (three characteristics involved in the evaluation)
«It is a bird?»
The first hypothesis that one of those present exclaims takes into account only two characteristics compatible with the context: birds can fly high and in several directions
«No, it’s Superman!»
When new evidence presents itself, the verdict changes. In this example, once the object comes into view and it is seen that it is Superman, a third hypothesis, with even more features (blue suit, red cape, etc.), turns out to be the correct one.
It seems, but it’s not
The simplest explanation is not always the most correct.
Occam’s Razor is a methodological principle, not a law that says what is true and what is not. That is, it does not suggest that the simplest explanations are always the true ones and that the more complex ones must be refuted in any situation.
SOURCES Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and The A to Z of Medieval Philosophy and Theology by Stephen F. Brown and Juan Carlos Flores