Philosophy 53 (205):382 - 385 (1978)
In his discussion note ‘J. J. C. Smart, Materialism and Occam's Razor’ Peter Glassen argues that it was inconsistent of me both to assert that realism is true and that Occam's razor is a reason for the materialist thesis. Glassen says that Occam's razor ‘ is not a physical thing, state or process at all ’. A little further down on the same page he uses the phrase ‘material or physical thing, state, or process’. It is possible, therefore, that Glassen regards the distinction between ‘material’ and ‘physical’ as unimportant in the present context. I think however that one way of replying to Glassen turns on this distinction
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Modified Occam's Razor: Parsimony, Pragmatics, and the Acquisition of Word Meaning.Thomas D. Bontly - 2005 - Mind and Language 20 (3):288–312.
Occam's Razor is a Double-Edged Sword: Reduced Interaction is Not Necessarily Reduced Power.D. H. Whalen - 2000 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (3):351-351.
Simple or Simplistic? Scientists' Views on Occam's Razor.Hauke Riesch - 2010 - Theoria 25 (1):75-90.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads30 ( #166,834 of 2,151,553 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #397,093 of 2,151,553 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.