The medieval philosopher and theologian William of Ockham is probably most known for what has been called "Ockham's razor." While I would like to know if Ockham was beardless, I am more interested in his philosophical razor. By applying the razor one is able to shave away unnecessary parts of an explanation and thus arrive at the truth by a more direct route. Ockham said: Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate or "Do not posit plurality without necessity." In other words, don’t multiply assumptions or entities you don’t need to explain something. The Razor also suggests that if two arguments seem equal in all other respects, the simplest explanation is the most likely to be true.
In presenting this to my Humanities class I looked for some illustrations but to no avail. Finally I came up with two of my own and covet any feedback you might have.
Which is the faster route to your destination, the interstate or a more direct path along secondary roads? If you look at a map you might conclude the shorter route but then you realize that the speed limit is 35 mph but the interstate is 65 mph. You decide that the shorter distance is still preferable, but then you realize that you have to assume hitting every green light, no trains, & no pedestrians in the crosswalks. You begin to realize that you must assume too many contingencies and go with the interstate as the fastest route.
Atheists argue that a naturalistic explanation of the universe makes God the “unnecessary hypothesis.” God the creator is an assumption that we do not need in the light of naturalism. Theists argue that a purely naturalistic explanation of the universe requires more assumptions such as life evolving from non-living matter and that matter is eternal though the physical universe did not exist prior to the big bang. Irreducible complexity, from the Intelligent Design movement, is essentially an application of Ockham’s razor. It argues that organisms have complex systems that can work only when fully formed. It is simpler to explain this phenomenon by appealing to special creation. Otherwise, you have to posit natural selection of non-usable parts in light of a more complex whole that will appear in the distant future.
Do you think Ockham shaves like this?
"In him all things hold together" (Colossians 1:17).
