Re: Occam

--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "tgpedersen" <tgpedersen@...>
wrote:

>
> On apppeals to Occam, or whichever way one wants to spell it:
>
> Popper mentions somewhere, but doesn't elaborate much, that when

given

> the choice between two equally falsifiable theories (whichever way

one

> defines that) one should prefers the simpler. This is as far as I

can

> see equivalent to Occam's advice. On how to make out which one is

the

> simpler, all he can suggest is something like counting the number

of

> symbols required to write the theory.
>
> But that introduces a whole new type of uncertainty into the

procedure:

> In what language, whether natural or made up, should theories be
> written? His offhand remark seems to suggest that there exists

such a

> universal and already canonical language in which theories must of
> necessity be written. Surprise: there is no such language! Any of

you

> who has been prolonged contact with logicians and computer

scientists

> know that there are bitter wars fought over the correct symbolic
> representations of states of affairs. Resorting to the deistic

Anglo-

> Saxon habit of writing Logic and Truth and Language with a capital
> letter will not cause a Logic, a Truth and a Language to exist on

the

> other bank of the river that divides matter from the realm of

ideas,

> because: they don't exist! Logics, truths and languages may exist,
> Logic, Truth and Language don't.
>
> Therefore: Appealing to Occam is asking to be graded on style,

until

> someone defines and we all agree on a Universal Scientific

Symbolic

> Language. Having studied Artificial Intelligence and its various
> proposed languages for some years I know whereof I speak.
>
>
> Torsten

<Resorting to the deistic Anglo-
Saxon habit of writing Logic and Truth and Language with a capital
letter will not cause a Logic, a Truth and a Language to exist on the
other bank of the river that divides matter from the realm of ideas,
because: they don't exist! Logics, truths and languages may exist,
Logic, Truth and Language don't.>

Exactly! This is almost an invitation to bring Goedel into
Occam's "heritage"...