Atheism In 60 Seconds

[JoltinJoe]

It's always funny (and obvious) when someone who has never read a word written by William of Ockham invokes Occam's Razor. A bunch of internet dumb-dumbs try to deflate serious philosophical and theological thought by invoking poor old William of Ockham, a Franciscan philosopher who firmly believed that God was the only necessary ontological truth. Those of us who have actually studied and read William of Ockham find it extremely ironic that internet atheists cite to this Franciscan friar in support of their claim that there is no God. But that is what the era of google scholarship has brought us: a lot of know-nothings distorting what little they've heard.

My advice is to avoid citing Occam's Razor until you really understand it.

NOTE that this thread did not impugn the Catholic Church.

No, but I'm get tired of all the whiz kids here who cite "Occam's Razor" without any real understanding of it, or who William of Ockham was. On these boards, "Occam's Razor" has become a tool of the lazy to dismiss other people's ideas and to dumb down every discussion.

Search "Occam" on this board and show me evidence that I am wrong.

[Vidav]

NOTE that this thread did not impugn the Catholic Church.

No, but I'm get tired of all the whiz kids here who cite "Occam's Razor" without any real understanding of it, or who William of Ockham was. On these boards, "Occam's Razor" has become a tool of the lazy to dismiss other people's ideas and to dumb down every discussion.

Search "Occam" on this board and show me evidence that I am wrong.

What about the other writings and philosphers that used the same idea before Mr. of Ockham was around? The common usage of it now is named after him but the idea predates him. So his personal beliefs shouldn't really play into it.

[JoltinJoe]

No, but I'm get tired of all the whiz kids here who cite "Occam's Razor" without any real understanding of it, or who William of Ockham was. On these boards, "Occam's Razor" has become a tool of the lazy to dismiss other people's ideas and to dumb down every discussion.

Search "Occam" on this board and show me evidence that I am wrong.

What about the other writings and philosphers that used the same idea before Mr. of Ockham was around? The common usage of it now is named after him but the idea predates him. So his personal beliefs shouldn't really play into it.

There were perhaps expressions that were comparable prior to William of Ockham; whether these expressions were comparable in application is debateable. For example. Ptolemy is said to have observed that the simplest explanation was usually the correct explanation, and this often cited as a statement of Occam's Razor prior to Ockham. However, Ockham actually rejected Ptomely's observation as not necessarily correct.

I was hoping to make my point quickly by reference to wikipedia, but what I discovered is that wikipedia only reinforces the common problem with the way Ockham applied his "razor."

Wiki says in its first sentence that Occam's Razor "is a principle urging one to select among competing hypotheses that which makes the fewest assumptions and thereby offers the simplest explanation of the effect." In fact, Ockham would take exception to the statement that the hypothesis which makes the "fewest assumptions" is by definition the one that offers the "simplest explanation." Likewise, he would reject that the "simplest explanation" is the one, by definition, which makes the "fewest assumptions." (Although in any given case, this may be true) (I should note too that the article later states, correctly, that the "simplest available theory need not be the most accurate.")

Ockham held that, when faced with two hypotheses of equal merit to explain an observation, the one which makes the fewest assumptions is preferred. In so observing, Ockham stressed that one should avoid making unnecessary assumptions in explaining phenomena because the idea involving fewer assumptions can be more easily tested. In framing the inquiry as such, Ockham was not advocating (as usually attributed to him) that the idea with fewer assumptions was usually correct, but that it was simply more capable of being tested and eventually deduced to be right or wrong. Accordingly, correctly understood, Occam's Razor is more a tool of ascertaining how to ascertain which, among competing hypotheses, is true, rather than a tool for specifying which one is correct.

[89Hen]

It's quick, just the facts

No, it's not. Listen again Sluggo.

[AZGrizFan]

It's quick, just the facts

No, it's not. Listen again Sluggo.

If I had to listen again I'd put ice picks in my ears.

[Cap'n Cat]

It's quick, just the facts

No, it's not. Listen again Sluggo.

I did, Nancy. Everything based on logic, not ghosts and frankincense.

[89Hen]

No, it's not. Listen again Sluggo.

I did, Nancy. Everything based on logic, not ghosts and frankincense.

Hmmm, you've toned down your rhetoric pretty quickly. We've gone from "just facts" to "based on logic". Where's that backpedalling smilie when you need it.

[D1B]

What about the other writings and philosphers that used the same idea before Mr. of Ockham was around? The common usage of it now is named after him but the idea predates him. So his personal beliefs shouldn't really play into it.

There were perhaps expressions that were comparable prior to William of Ockham; whether these expressions were comparable in application is debateable. For example. Ptolemy is said to have observed that the simplest explanation was usually the correct explanation, and this often cited as a statement of Occam's Razor prior to Ockham. However, Ockham actually rejected Ptomely's observation as not necessarily correct.

I was hoping to make my point quickly by reference to wikipedia, but what I discovered is that wikipedia only reinforces the common problem with the way Ockham applied his "razor."

Wiki says in its first sentence that Occam's Razor "is a principle urging one to select among competing hypotheses that which makes the fewest assumptions and thereby offers the simplest explanation of the effect." In fact, Ockham would take exception to the statement that the hypothesis which makes the "fewest assumptions" is by definition the one that offers the "simplest explanation." Likewise, he would reject that the "simplest explanation" is the one, by definition, which makes the "fewest assumptions." (Although in any given case, this may be true) (I should note too that the article later states, correctly, that the "simplest available theory need not be the most accurate.")

Ockham held that, when faced with two hypotheses of equal merit to explain an observation, the one which makes the fewest assumptions is preferred. In so observing, Ockham stressed that one should avoid making unnecessary assumptions in explaining phenomena because the idea involving fewer assumptions can be more easily tested. In framing the inquiry as such, Ockham was not advocating (as usually attributed to him) that the idea with fewer assumptions was usually correct, but that it was simply more capable of being tested and eventually deduced to be right or wrong. Accordingly, correctly understood, Occam's Razor is more a tool of ascertaining how to ascertain which, among competing hypotheses, is true, rather than a tool for specifying which one is correct.

What a dork - doesn't understand that concepts change and may have meaning slightly different from original intent.

Joe, how bout we call it "D1B's Razor"? "Explanations that require torture, ignorance, secrect cults, centuries of tyranny and brainwashing, mountains of convoluted nonsensical dogma and retarded fairy tale-assumptions are probably bullshit and inferior to simple and honest explanations based on observable data, critical ethical inquiry and science. "

[D1B]

What about the other writings and philosphers that used the same idea before Mr. of Ockham was around? The common usage of it now is named after him but the idea predates him. So his personal beliefs shouldn't really play into it.

There were perhaps expressions that were comparable prior to William of Ockham; whether these expressions were comparable in application is debateable. For example. Ptolemy is said to have observed that the simplest explanation was usually the correct explanation, and this often cited as a statement of Occam's Razor prior to Ockham. However, Ockham actually rejected Ptomely's observation as not necessarily correct.

I was hoping to make my point quickly by reference to wikipedia, but what I discovered is that wikipedia only reinforces the common problem with the way Ockham applied his "razor."

Wiki says in its first sentence that Occam's Razor "is a principle urging one to select among competing hypotheses that which makes the fewest assumptions and thereby offers the simplest explanation of the effect." In fact, Ockham would take exception to the statement that the hypothesis which makes the "fewest assumptions" is by definition the one that offers the "simplest explanation." Likewise, he would reject that the "simplest explanation" is the one, by definition, which makes the "fewest assumptions." (Although in any given case, this may be true) (I should note too that the article later states, correctly, that the "simplest available theory need not be the most accurate.")

Ockham held that, when faced with two hypotheses of equal merit to explain an observation, the one which makes the fewest assumptions is preferred. In so observing, Ockham stressed that one should avoid making unnecessary assumptions in explaining phenomena because the idea involving fewer assumptions can be more easily tested. In framing the inquiry as such, Ockham was not advocating (as usually attributed to him) that the idea with fewer assumptions was usually correct, but that it was simply more capable of being tested and eventually deduced to be right or wrong. Accordingly, correctly understood, Occam's Razor is more a tool of ascertaining how to ascertain which, among competing hypotheses, is true, rather than a tool for specifying which one is correct.

Nice backpedal, Joe.

[D1B]

Shallow?



Joe, your "ism" absolutely relies on the most ridiculous of assumptions. Please refrain from confusing its volumes of dogma with intelligence.

Occam's Razor hardly advocates making the dumbest assumption, i.e., creation came from nothing.

In fact, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is that creation was made by a Creator.

If you had only really gone to college ...

Please refrain from addressing me on these boards anymore. I am imposing an IQ minimum and you fall significantly below it.

Uhh, thought we were referring to world views, not creation versions. You aint in court.

Nice oversimplication and strawman. This may work for defending pedophiles but, it aint gonna fly here.


Joltin Joe's explanation
The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

D1B's Explanation
"Who the fuck knows?"


Which one makes more sense?

[JoltinJoe]

Joe, how bout we call it "D1B's Razor"? "Explanations that require thought and higher intelligence are beyond the grasp of General Studies majors from UNI"

[D1B]

Joe, how bout we call it "D1B's Razor"? "Explanations that require thought and higher intelligence are beyond the grasp of General Studies majors from UNI"

Yawn, you got nothing. Nice surrender.


Joltin Joe

[D1B]

Joe, how bout we call it "D1B's Razor"? "Explanations that require thought and higher intelligence are beyond the grasp of General Studies majors from UNI"

Fordumb

[kalm]

Occam's Razor hardly advocates making the dumbest assumption, i.e., creation came from nothing.

In fact, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions is that creation was made by a Creator.

If you had only really gone to college ...

Please refrain from addressing me on these boards anymore. I am imposing an IQ minimum and you fall significantly below it.

Uhh, thought we were referring to world views, not creation versions. You aint in court.

Nice oversimplication and strawman. This may work for defending pedophiles but, it aint gonna fly here.


Joltin Joe's explanation
The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

D1B's Explanation
"Who the fuck knows?"


Which one makes more sense?

Joe, the proof is in the pudding.

[JoltinJoe]

Uhh, thought we were referring to world views, not creation versions. You aint in court.

Nice oversimplication and strawman. This may work for defending pedophiles but, it aint gonna fly here.


Joltin Joe's explanation
The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

D1B's Explanation
"Who the **** knows?"


Which one makes more sense?

Joe, the proof is in the pudding.

Agreed ... unequivocal proof that D1B is a big fat loser.

[D1B]

Joe, the proof is in the pudding.

Agreed ... unequivocal proof that D1B is a big fat loser.

Yet you continue to shit your pants every time you show your face here.

[JoltinJoe]

Agreed ... unequivocal proof that D1B is a big fat loser.

Yet you continue to **** your pants every time you show your face here.

Just shut up and stop making an ass out of yourself.

Yea, yea, you use to play football and you thought you were really cool.

[AshevilleApp]

Yet you continue to **** your pants every time you show your face here.

Just shut up and stop making an ass out of yourself.

Yea, yea, you use to play football and you thought you were really cool.

Well I see this has gone down the usual path.

[D1B]

Yet you continue to **** your pants every time you show your face here.

Just shut up and stop making an ass out of yourself.

Yea, yea, you use to play football and you thought you were really cool.

Funny, you always bring football up. I'm sorry you born a dwarf and could not partake, but that aint my fault. Curse Jesus, not me.

Anyway, what's your beef with me? Perhaps you should seek anger management therepy?

Peace out.

[AZGrizFan]

Just shut up and stop making an ass out of yourself.

Yea, yea, you use to play football and you thought you were really cool.

Funny, you always bring football up. I'm sorry you born a dwarf and could not partake, but that aint my fault. Curse Jesus, not me.

Anyway, what's your beef with me? Perhaps you should seek anger management therepy?

Peace out.

[Cap'n Cat]

Just shut up and stop making an ass out of yourself.

Yea, yea, you use to play football and you thought you were really cool.

Funny, you always bring football up. I'm sorry you born a dwarf and could not partake, but that aint my fault. Curse Jesus, not me.

Anyway, what's your beef with me? Perhaps you should seek anger management therepy?

Peace out.