Philosophical razor

Last updated

In philosophy, a razor is a principle or rule of thumb that allows one to eliminate ("shave off") unlikely explanations for a phenomenon, or avoid unnecessary actions. [1] [2] [3]

Contents

Examples

Razors include:

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Falsifiability</span> Property of a statement that can be logically contradicted

Falsifiability is a deductive standard of evaluation of scientific theories and hypotheses, introduced by the philosopher of science Karl Popper in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1934). A theory or hypothesis is falsifiable if it can be logically contradicted by an empirical test.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Karl Popper</span> Austrian–British philosopher of science (1902–1994)

Sir Karl Raimund Popper was an Austrian–British philosopher, academic and social commentator. One of the 20th century's most influential philosophers of science, Popper is known for his rejection of the classical inductivist views on the scientific method in favour of empirical falsification. According to Popper, a theory in the empirical sciences can never be proven, but it can be falsified, meaning that it can be scrutinised with decisive experiments. Popper was opposed to the classical justificationist account of knowledge, which he replaced with critical rationalism, namely "the first non-justificational philosophy of criticism in the history of philosophy".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Pseudoscience</span> Unscientific claims wrongly presented as scientific

Pseudoscience consists of statements, beliefs, or practices that claim to be both scientific and factual but are incompatible with the scientific method. Pseudoscience is often characterized by contradictory, exaggerated or unfalsifiable claims; reliance on confirmation bias rather than rigorous attempts at refutation; lack of openness to evaluation by other experts; absence of systematic practices when developing hypotheses; and continued adherence long after the pseudoscientific hypotheses have been experimentally discredited. It is not the same as junk science.

The scientific method is an empirical method for acquiring knowledge that has characterized the development of science since at least the 17th century. The scientific method involves careful observation coupled with rigorous scepticism, because cognitive assumptions can distort the interpretation of the observation. Scientific inquiry includes creating a hypothesis through inductive reasoning, testing it through experiments and statistical analysis, and adjusting or discarding the hypothesis based on the results.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William of Ockham</span> English Franciscan friar and theologian (c. 1287–1347)

William of Ockham or Occam was an English Franciscan friar, scholastic philosopher, apologist, and Catholic theologian, who is believed to have been born in Ockham, a small village in Surrey. He is considered to be one of the major figures of medieval thought and was at the centre of the major intellectual and political controversies of the 14th century. He is commonly known for Occam's razor, the methodological principle that bears his name, and also produced significant works on logic, physics and theology. William is remembered in the Church of England with a commemoration on the 10th of April.

In philosophy, Occam's razor is the problem-solving principle that recommends searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements. It is also known as the principle of parsimony or the law of parsimony. Attributed to William of Ockham, a 14th-century English philosopher and theologian, it is frequently cited as Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem, which translates as "Entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity", although Occam never used these exact words. Popularly, the principle is sometimes paraphrased as "The simplest explanation is usually the best one."

Hanlon's razor is an adage or rule of thumb that states:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Problem of induction</span> Question of whether inductive reasoning leads to definitive knowledge

First formulated by David Hume, the problem of induction questions our reasons for believing that the future will resemble the past, or more broadly it questions predictions about unobserved things based on previous observations. This inference from the observed to the unobserved is known as "inductive inferences". Hume, while acknowledging that everyone does and must make such inferences, argued that there is no non-circular way to justify them, thereby undermining one of the Enlightenment pillars of rationality.

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that can be repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, some theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment. In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.

The indeterminacy problem is posed as a kind of paradox in the study of the sociology and history of science. It is often used as an argument against the rational value of scientific thought.

Verificationism, also known as the verification principle or the verifiability criterion of meaning, is the philosophical doctrine which asserts that a statement is meaningful only if it is either empirically verifiable or a truth of logic.

Models of scientific inquiry have two functions: first, to provide a descriptive account of how scientific inquiry is carried out in practice, and second, to provide an explanatory account of why scientific inquiry succeeds as well as it appears to do in arriving at genuine knowledge. The philosopher Wesley C. Salmon described scientific inquiry:

The search for scientific knowledge ends far back into antiquity. At some point in the past, at least by the time of Aristotle, philosophers recognized that a fundamental distinction should be drawn between two kinds of scientific knowledge—roughly, knowledge that and knowledge why. It is one thing to know that each planet periodically reverses the direction of its motion with respect to the background of fixed stars; it is quite a different matter to know why. Knowledge of the former type is descriptive; knowledge of the latter type is explanatory. It is explanatory knowledge that provides scientific understanding of the world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hypothesis</span> Proposed explanation for an observation, phenomenon, or scientific problem

A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it. Scientists generally base scientific hypotheses on previous observations that cannot satisfactorily be explained with the available scientific theories. Even though the words "hypothesis" and "theory" are often used interchangeably, a scientific hypothesis is not the same as a scientific theory. A working hypothesis is a provisionally accepted hypothesis proposed for further research in a process beginning with an educated guess or thought.

Explanatory power is the ability of a hypothesis or theory to explain the subject matter effectively to which it pertains. Its opposite is explanatory impotence.

Interactionism or interactionist dualism is the theory in the philosophy of mind which holds that matter and mind are two distinct and independent substances that exert causal effects on one another. An example of your mind influencing your body would be if you are depressed, you can observe the effects on your body, such as a slouched posture, a lackluster smile, etc. Another example, this time of your body affecting your mind would be: If you struck your toe very forcefully on a door, you would experience terrible pain. Interactionism is one type of dualism, traditionally a type of substance dualism though more recently also sometimes a form of property dualism. Many philosophers and scientists have responded to this theory with arguments both supporting and opposing its relevance to life and whether the theory corresponds to reality.

An index list of articles about the philosophy of science.

Michael D. Alder is an Australian mathematician, formerly an assistant professor at the University of Western Australia. Alder is known for his popular writing, such as sardonic articles about the lack of basic arithmetic skills in young adults.

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor that serves as a general rule for rejecting certain knowledge claims. It states "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". The razor was created by and later named after author and journalist Christopher Hitchens (1949–2011). It implies that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens used this phrase specifically in the context of refuting religious belief.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence</span> Evidentiary standard for extraordinary claims

"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence", also known as the Sagan standard, is an aphorism popularized by science communicator Carl Sagan. He used the phrase in his 1979 book Broca's Brain and the 1980 television program Cosmos. It has been described as fundamental to the scientific method and is regarded as encapsulating the basic principles of scientific skepticism.

<i>Is There a God?</i> 1996 book by Richard Swinburne

Is There a God? is a 1996 book by British philosopher of religion Richard Swinburne, claiming the existence of the Abrahamic God. The argument rests on an updated version of natural theology with biological evolution and Big Bang theory using scientific inference. In 2010, a revised version of the original book was released under the same title.

References

Listen to this article (2 minutes)
Sound-icon.svg
This audio file was created from a revision of this article dated 30 September 2023 (2023-09-30), and does not reflect subsequent edits.
  1. Garg, Anu (17 May 2010). "Occam's razor". A.Word.A.Day. Archived from the original on 9 March 2014. Retrieved 25 February 2014.
  2. Downie, R. S. (November 1989). "Moral Philosophy". In Eatwell, John; Milgate, Murray; Newman, Peter (eds.). The Invisible Hand. Palgrave MacMillan. pp. 213–222. ISBN   9781349203130.
  3. McLean, Sheila A. M., ed. (2013). First Do No Harm: Law, Ethics and Healthcare. Ashgate. ISBN   9781409496199.
  4. Alder, Mike (2004). "Newton's Flaming Laser Sword". Philosophy Now . 46: 29–33. Archived from the original on 4 December 2017. Retrieved 26 January 2018. Also available in PDF format: Alder, Mike (2004). "Newton's Flaming Laser Sword" (PDF). Mike Alder's Home Page. University of Western Australia. Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 November 2011.
  5. Einstein, Albert (1934). "On the Method of Theoretical Physics". Philosophy of Science. 1 (2): 165 [163–169]. doi:10.1086/286316. ISSN   0031-8248. JSTOR   184387. S2CID   44787169.
  6. Mettenheim, Christoph von (1998). Popper Versus Einstein: On the Philosophical Foundations of Physics. Mohr Siebeck. p. 34. ISBN   978-3-16-146910-7.
  7. Geis, Gilbert; Bienen, Leigh B. (1998). Crimes of the Century: From Leopold and Loeb to O.J. Simpson. UPNE. p. 39. ISBN   978-1-55553-360-1 via Google Books.
  8. Hazlett, A. (2007). "Grice's razor". Metaphilosophy. 38 (5): 669. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9973.2007.00512.x.
  9. "Implicature, 6: Gricean Theory". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Archived from the original on 11 December 2016. Retrieved 27 December 2016.
  10. "Hanlon's Razor". The Jargon File 4.4.7. Archived from the original on 30 April 2011. Retrieved 25 February 2014.
  11. Ratcliffe, Susan, ed. (2016). Oxford Essential Quotations: Facts (4th ed.). Oxford University Press. ISBN   9780191826719 . Retrieved 4 November 2020. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.
  12. Miles, M. (2003). Inroads: Paths in Ancient and Modern Western Philosophy. University of Toronto Press. p.  543. ISBN   978-0802037442 via Internet Archive.
  13. Forrest, P. (2001). "Counting the cost of modal realism". In Preyer, G.; Siebelt, F. (eds.). Reality and Humean Supervenience: Essays on the Philosophy of David Lewis. Studies in Epistemology and Cognitive Theory. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 93. ISBN   978-0742512016 via Google Books.
  14. Popper, Karl (1972). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Hutchinson. ISBN   9780091117207.
  15. Sagan, Carl (2021). Broca's Brain: Reflections on the Romance of Science. New York: Ballantine Books. ISBN   978-0-345-33689-7.