Is occam's razor inherently anti-science?

0% Normal
12 Comments

Occam's Razor is a philosophical principle that states the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one. The simplest answer to literally everything is "God did/made it". Doesn't this essentially discourage us from trying to find complicated truth? Because if pursuing the truth ends up being complicated, it's most likely not the correct answer, at least according to Occam's Razor

Voting Results
0% Normal
Based on 4 votes (0 yes)
Help us keep this site organized and clean. Thanks!
[ Report Post ]
Comments ( 12 )
  • JellyBeanBandit
    1 year ago

    "God did/made it" isn't the simplest solution because it brings up a load of other questions. Like why did he do/make it? What made God? What is the nature of God? Are there any other gods? Why doesn't he reveal himself to have made the world? Why did he make the world to such a poor standard? etc.

    Besides, Occam's Razor doesn't discourage anyone from finding out about the world, because science demands proof of everything. For example, even gravity is still technically considered a theory because it hasn't been proven, even though the theory of gravity obviously true.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    2
    2
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      1 year ago

      Technically, there are realms where the theory of gravity doesn't hold true. When you start working on macroscopic levels like the entire universe (celestial bodies orbit around larger celestial bodies, but why don't free-standing galaxies drift towards any discernable gravitational pull?) and microscopic levels like on the atomic level (why don't atoms fall toward the earth instead of staying as part of whatever matter they help compose?). I guess gravity is still adhered to in those instances, just that it's behavior changes from what's expected

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • olderdude-xx
        1 year ago

        There is no realm in our known universe where gravity (or curved spacetime) does not hold. However, there are other forces in nature as well - and for very tiny objects those other forces usually dominate and control - even though there is a very faint "gravitational (curved spacetime)" effects on the particle or object.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • LloydAsher
          1 year ago

          Centrifugal force does not exist as a force itself, rather it's a byproduct of observation rather than the reality of the true forces at work (inertia)

          The science we come to know may be fundamentally changed as we progress as it can just be further examined such as centrifugal force.

          Currently we have a good grasp on what's possible. Though at the extremes of the universe can only be partial solved through mathematics. Not agreeing with the OP wholly. As far as we are aware gravity is in effect everywhere. But in the void of what constitutes the universe, it may not be. Though that's widely dependent on if the universe dies hot or cold. Preferably I hope hot, as a hot death of the universe can just reset reality as we know it.

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
        • Anonymous Post Author
          1 year ago

          Well said. That's a much better explanation of what I was trying to say

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
      • JellyBeanBandit
        1 year ago

        Well I'm no scientist, but I'm pretty sure the reason galaxies don't all collide with each other due to gravity is because the universe's expansion moves them apart at a much faster rate. And the reason atoms stay stuck to other atoms in an object, rather than fall toward the earth instead, is because the chemical bonds that keep atoms held together are much stronger than the force of gravity.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        0
        0
          -
        • Anonymous Post Author
          1 year ago

          I was using those questions as hypothetical examples, but your answers actually make a lot of sense. I still stand my point though, if only for the fact that in your explanation of why atoms stay in place gravity does behave differently on the atomic level, hence why atomic structures are able to resist gravity to form whatever it is they're a part of

          Comment Hidden ( show )
          0
          0
  • Sirilus
    1 year ago

    That's not entirely what Occam's Razor is. It's more so cutting out explanations that are lease likely to come to a more reasonable conclusion. "If you hear hoofbeats think horses not zebras" for instance is a common quote for it, but even in this example it could very well be something else causing hoofbeats. The cause still has to be investigated.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    1
    1
  • Tommythecaty
    1 year ago

    “God made it” is by far the most complicated answer imaginable actually 🤣

    Occam’s razor is a way of narrowing down likelihood, hardly anti science.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
  • LloydAsher
    1 year ago

    The simplest solution is usually the correct one. God made it, is a simplification of known and yet unknown processes. These arent mutually exclusive ideas. God isnt the solution it's the original cause. The percise solution is what occams razor is about. The less "moving parts" less hypotheticall ideas needed to take to make the solution work the better.

    So yes god made it. But it can be further broken down into why it happens. God made the universe thus everything was made by god, including the scientists that discovered how god did so.

    I dont think saying that God controls the wind is inherently incorrect. Just that its vague. Science is by definition, tries to be precise. So god created cold and hot air that circulate creating the phenomenon of wind. Or god created the earth, with gasses being present and due to thermodynamics creates wind.

    Comment Hidden ( show )
    0
    0
      -
    • Anonymous Post Author
      1 year ago

      The reason I used "God did/made it" as an example is because not everyone believes in God. Theists might be okay with accepting "God did it" as the baseline, most simplistic answer out there, but for atheists I can imagine it would be as meaningful as hearing "Gary the lime green unicorn did it"

      Comment Hidden ( show )
      0
      0
        -
      • LloydAsher
        1 year ago

        You are referring to god of the gaps. The idea that we use god to fill in the blanks to our understanding of the world.

        In this line of thinking, god either exists or does not. Theres no in between as there are fewer and fewer phenomena that cant be explained. Thus god cannot exist just to be a gap filler. Everything or nothing.

        Comment Hidden ( show )
        1
        1