At 10:47:13 PM on Saturday, January 24, 2004, Glen Gordon
wrote:
> Occam's Razor.
You should seriously consider dropping this term from your
vocabulary, because you don't understand it. Ockham's Razor
is not at all the straightforward tool that you seem to
think it is. In all the time that I've been reading your
comments here and elsewhere, you've never recognized that
what theory/explanation is simplest depends very much on
what evidence one considers relevant and on how one weights
it.
> I'm not interested in debating the nature of logic. It's
> self-evident.
Logic is almost never the issue in these arguments; the
argument is almost always over the relative importance of
different types of evidence.
(And before you start jumping up and down, please note that
despite some methodological concerns, I rather like the
uvular hypothesis; I'm just tired of the constant
misrepresentation of the nature of many of these
disagreements.)
Brian