Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||Philosophy of science, statistics, and machine learning all recommend the selection of simple theories or models on the basis of empirical data, where simplicity has something to do with minimizing independent entities, principles, causes, or equational coefficients. This intuitive preference for simplicity is called Ockham's razor, after the fourteenth century theologian and logician William of Ockham. But in spite of its intuitive appeal, how could Ockham's razor help one find the true theory? For, in an updated version of Plato's Meno paradox, if we already know that the truth is simple, we don't need Ockham's help. And if we don't already know that the truth is simple, what entitles us to assume that it is?|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Michael J. Cholbi (2003). Contingency and Divine Knowledge in Ockham. American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 77 (1):81-91.
Arnold Zellner, Hugo A. Keuzenkamp & Michael McAleer (eds.) (2001). Simplicity, Inference and Modeling: Keeping It Sophisticatedly Simple. Cambridge University Press.
Kevin Kelly (2004). Justification as Truth-Finding Efficiency: How Ockham's Razor Works. Minds and Machines 14 (4):485-505.
Kevin T. Kelly (2004). Justification as Truth-Finding Efficiency: How Ockham's Razor Works. Minds and Machines 14 (4):485-505.
William Ockham (1983). Predestination, Foreknowledge, and Future Contingents. Indianapolis: Hackett.
Conor Mayo-Wilson & Kevin Kelly (2010). Ockham Efficiency Theorem for Stochastic Empirical Methods. Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (6):679 - 712.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #71,281 of 739,325 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,538 of 739,325 )
How can I increase my downloads?