In article <35344130.AF883C70 at splusnet.com>, Lee Merkel <merkel at splusnet.com> writes:
>SW wrote:
>>> Occam's Razor is merely the way any problem or mystery should be
>> approached. With common sense logic and without a vested interest in
>> what the solution 'should' be.
>>>> Stephen Walsh
>> Inherent in Occam's razor is the fact that it WILL be wrong
> with a varying ratio, depending on the nature of the subject
> being studied.
No, why?
> It assumes the least unusual explanation for everything.
The least unusual explanation that's consistent with evidence. That's
important.
> However, many things in our anthropocentric view of reality
> occur in ways certain to make Occam's Razor very
> uncomfortable. You may find these occurrences in places
> like "news of the weird," the Congressional Record, declassified
> CIA and FBI files, and the pages of science journals (many
> discoveries surprising to logically efficient minds turn up
> as journal reports).
Quite wrong here. Discoveries turn up based on new evidence.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron at cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"