Difference between revisions of "Occam's Razor"

From PKC
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor Occam's Razor] a.k.a. the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony. It was stated by [[wikipedia:William_of_Ockham|William of Ockham]], that  
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor Occam's Razor] a.k.a. the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony. It was stated by [[wikipedia:William_of_Ockham|William of Ockham]], that  
  Don't multiply without necessity!<ref>{{Paper/What Not to Multiply Without Necessity}}</ref>
  Don't multiply without necessity!<ref>{{:Paper/What Not to Multiply Without Necessity}}</ref>
The same statement is often mistakenly stated as follow:'''
It is often inaccurately stated as follow:
When there are choices amongst possible answers, the shortest answer is the best answer.'''
'''When there are choices amongst possible answers, the shortest answer is the best answer.'''
 
=Other essential ideas=
[[Occam's Razor]] relates to the ideas of [[unity]] and [[consistency]]. It also implies the notion of [[contradiction]] avoidance.


<noinclude>
<noinclude>
Line 9: Line 12:


=Related Pages=
=Related Pages=
{{#ask:[[Category:{{PageName}}]]
{{#ask:[[Category:{{PAGENAME}}]]
|format=list
|format=list
}}
}}


[[Category:Heuristic]]
[[Category:Unity]]
[[Category:Consistence]]
[[Category:Paradigm Shift]]
</noinclude>
</noinclude>

Latest revision as of 20:36, 3 January 2022

Occam's Razor a.k.a. the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony. It was stated by William of Ockham, that

Don't multiply without necessity![1]

It is often inaccurately stated as follow: When there are choices amongst possible answers, the shortest answer is the best answer.

Other essential ideas

Occam's Razor relates to the ideas of unity and consistency. It also implies the notion of contradiction avoidance.


References

  1. Schaffer, Jonathan (2015). What Not to Multiply Without Necessity (PDF). Australasian Journal of Philosophy. 93. pp. 644–664. doi:10.1080/00048402.2014.992447. 

Related Pages

Paradigm shift