Re: Occam Razor

From: Saibal Mitra <smitra.domain.name.hidden>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 2000 20:00:45 +0100

George Levy wrote:

> A philosophy professor friend of mine rejected the use of Occam razor to
> justify the many-world interpretation. He pointed out to me that
> classically Occam razor aims at simplifying the object, not the theory
> behind the object.
>
> The way he sees it, the many-world interpretation achieves a simple
> theory at the expense of a very large object, and therefore, cannot be
> justified by the classical Occam razor. This point is one of the
> favorite criticism of the anti-many-worlder advocates. Thus Occam razor
> can only be used if we are very clear about its meaning: the simplest
> theory is selected rather than the simplest object.
>
> The history of science, and in particular Astronomy has been an
> expansion of our horizons. The perceived world has been getting larger
> and larger and more and more complex as science progresses. Let's be
> clear when we talk about Occam.
>
> George
>
But then one shouldn't use Occam to justify some version of a many-worlds
hypothesis. It's the other way around. If one assumes a suitable version of
many-worlds, Occam naturally follows.

Saibal
Received on Sat Dec 16 2000 - 11:07:32 PST