1 upvotes, 0 direct replies (showing 0)
View submission: The NewToReddit Encyclopaedia Redditica v2
Occam's Razor is a saying commonly known as an “Eponymous Law”, but more accurately as a Philosophical Razor[1] that reads ”Entities should not be multiplied without necessity.”[2].
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_razor
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor
In philosophy, a razor is a principle or a rule of thumb that allows for the elimination (the “shaving off”) of unlikely explanations for a phenomenon.
Applied broadly, this particular principle suggests that out of two competing theories, the simpler explanation is more likely to be correct. Also called “the law of economy” or “the law of parsimony”, Occam's Razor gives precedence to simplicity to avoid unnecessary or improbable assumptions. This principle is attributed to the 14th century logician and Franciscan friar William of Ockham, but the general idea goes back at least as far as Aristotle, who wrote *"Nature operates in the shortest way possible."*
It is important to note that, like any mental model, Occam’s Razor is not foolproof. There are exceptions to any rule, and we should never blindly follow the results of applying a mental model which logic, experience, or empirical evidence contradict. When you hear hoofbeats behind you, in most cases you should think horses, not zebras - unless you are out on the African savannah. Or alpacas if you’re in Birmingham (U.K.)[3].
3: https://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2022/06/10/alpaca-runs-loose-Soho-Road-Birmingham/1591654875799/
The opposite of Occam’s Razor is “Occam’s Duct Tape”, which is when someone approaches a problem with a ridiculously large number of assumptions. Also known as Occam's Krazy Glue or Occam's Stapler, this is only used ironically as it involves making as many unnecessary and irrelevant assumptions as possible.
While a philosophical razor can be a useful mental shortcut that allows you to make decisions and solve problems quickly and easily, it is not an unbreakable law or rule, and several “anti-razors” have been devised over the years to counter them.
For instance, Walter Chatton (c. 1290–1343) was a contemporary of William of Ockham who took exception to Occam's Razor and Ockham's use of it. In response he devised his own Anti-razor: *"If three things are not enough to verify an affirmative proposition about things, a fourth must be added, and so on."*
A paraphrase of Occam's Razor (the simplest diagnosis is the most likely to be correct) forms one of the three maxims of medicine[4], with the other two being anti-razors: Hickam's Dictum (multiple disease entities are more likely than one), and Crabtree's Bludgeon (the tendency to make data fit to an explanation we hold dear).
4: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34355545/
5: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/577801
Whichever explanation is correct, Hickam’s Dictum was a response to when one single unifying diagnosis is not possible. While Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest explanation is the most likely, implying in medicine that diagnosticians should assume a single cause for multiple symptoms, one form of Hickam’s Dictum states: *"A man can have as many diseases as he damn well pleases.”* So, for instance, while a headache diagnosed with Occam’s Razor is just, in fact, a headache (which for the vast majority of cases is true), Hickam’s Dictum allows for the possibility for it to also be a symptom of something less benign (which in significantly fewer cases is also true).
Reddit, as you would expect, takes Occam's Razor Very Seriously Indeed™[6], and is a common subject[7] often raised at ELI5 or CMV[8].
6: https://www.reddit.com/r/askphilosophy/comments/nad12f/how_does_one_use_ockhams_razor_properly/
7: https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2ua12u/eli5_why_is_occams_razor_a_thing/
There's nothing here!