Occam’s Razor

It is often misquoted as “Occam’s Razor tells us that the simplest answer is the most likely one.” – This is FALSE.

Occam’s razor is perhaps one of the most misunderstood and misused quotes of all time. At no point does William of Ockham ever state anything like “the simplest answer is often the right one.”

As the originator, William of Ockham, put it; Frustra fit per plura quod potest fieri per pauciora. [It is futile to do with more things that which can be done with fewer] (Summa Totius Logicae)

Occam’s razor is a principle that generally recommends selecting among competing hypotheses that which makes the fewest new assumptions, when the hypotheses are equal in other respects – as a starting point for testing each of those hypotheses.

Also, keep in mind, Occam’s Razor is a philosophical guideline, not an actual rule of logic. Many appeals to Occam’s Razor simply assume that “simpler is better,” meaning whichever answer has the fewest words, parts, or premises is correct by default. Occam’s Razor is often accompanied by faulty logic and sloppy handling of evidence.

It fits into the same category as rules-of-thumb, proverbs, and other generalities. Rule of thumb is not an absolute. Occam’s Razor is the same: the simplest explanation is not necessarily the correct one. Simply because an explanation is simpler or less lacking in details or complexity does not mean it’s actually a better/true explanation. Many times the truth proves the opposite, that “truth is stranger than fiction.” Sometimes the “simplest” explanation, whatever that means to a particular person, is not in reality the correct explanation.

The important part is selecting a hypothesis. When you’re trying to figure out which explanation for something you’ve observed is correct, the best approach is to test the hypothesis that you can eliminate most quickly. It’s not “The simplest answer is probably correct” – but rather that it makes sense to start with the possibilities that are easiest to eliminate. Applying it as an excuse to deny even considering any other possibilities is merely mental laziness.

For example if you have phenomenon X and one theory needs factors A, B and C to explain it, and the other theory just needs particle D, then the second theory is preferred to be tested first just because it’s easier to test the lesser number of factors. It doesn’t mean it’s the correct theory, just the easiest/quickest theory to test.

Occam’s razor can be useful as a tool for problem solving, it should not be referred to merely so you can make up an excuse or a short cut for skipping the consideration of other possibilities entirely. The simplest explanation is often based only on What You Currently Know, and if there are factors and details you’re unaware of, then your “simplest explanation” will lead you astray.

History and science is filled with examples of simpler hypotheses that were wrong, and more complex ones which are correct. The Keplerian idea of elliptical planetary orbits around the gravitational centre of the Solar System is far more complicated than the ancient belief that the Sun went around the Earth or the relatively simple (compared to Kepler’s) Copernican concept of circular orbits. The first model of the atom assumed that atoms were little homogeneous balls, which was the simplest explanation that fit What Was Known At The Time. The ideas of a nucleus and orbiting electrons was added much later, when it became obvious that atoms weren’t little balls according to what was being observed. Other subatomic particles were added to the list later too, so that “simpler” model of the atom turned out to be “wrong” as well.

The idea that the Moon landings were all faked is a simpler explanation than the possibility of space travel. It’s certainly easier to comprehend Newtonian Mechanics than Quantum Mechanics or Einsteinian Relativity. It’s simpler to blame “The Jews” for all wars and financial collapses than to comprehend the complexities of competing national and financial interests and the influence of national cultures.

Occam’s razor has its limitations and it is not an argument winner, nor is it a club to batter opponents in debate as if “simple is always right” – because often “simple” is the wrong answer too.

(It seems a LOT of folks don’t get it)