You must log in or # to comment.
Occam’s Razor is about selecting the hypothesis with the least assumptions which is often mistaken for the simplest.
a perfect example of why you can’t just go with the answer that seems to be the correct one in true Occam’s Razor form, but usuing it as the starting point
“The most obvious answer is often the correct one”, he said, nodding sagely.
and Occam is probably some YouTuber and this is their product.
Yeah, that makes sense
The point is that is what you pick when two hypotheses are as likely.
Here there is one hypothesis so you can’t apply it.
And if there is a second hypothesis, it should be something like “it’s a reference to something specific” which is more likely than everyone talking about a specific razor of a random dude with a weird name.
It’s either a razor owned by ocham (simple) or it’s a philosophical concept about decision making when presented with ideas of similar likelihood but varying complexity (complicated).
The razor is about the option that requires the fewer assumptions.
The first one implies that somehow, a lot of people are talking about the razor of one guy with a very uncommon name. It is a much more costly hypothesis than to consider that this “razor” is an abstract concept instead.
I think you’re mixing up “complex” with “complicated.” the first answer has no complexity (detail) and the second has a lot, but neither is complicated. You could make either sound more or less complex.
To actually compare them, the first should be “a shaving razor owned by Occam” and the second should be “a philosophical razor created by Occam.” Now they have the same amount of detail, and the second is far simpler to understand why someone would know about it.
Well of course Occam’s razor would say that Occam’s razor is simply Occam’s razor
It’s the simplest explanation. Why bother to come up with additional, more complex explanations?
There used to be a web store that sold a tshirt of a monk riding a scooter with the caption “Occam’s razor” but I can’t find it.
I don’t want any AI bullshit either.
Edit: ddg didn’t find it but Google sort of did.
It’s well know that they are a member of that famous legal firm, Dunning, Kruger, & Occam.
Well, that’s the simplest explanation.
