Occam's razor states that the simplist explaination to a problem is probably the correct one. Isn't the theory that God created everything over just a few days much simpler than the theory that the stars, planets, and cell originated by themselves, followed by cells connecting together over several million years to form extremely complex organisms?
30 comments
Tell us how he did it.
Otherwise, nope.
Actually, Occam has his own definition of simplicity: the least number of ontological entities. That is, something is simpler if it assumes fewer existing things. So, which is simpler:
God and the Universe
Take your time. I'm sure you can learn to count.
Goddidit,,,one word,,, so obviously this is what Occam had in mind all along. Why didn't we figure this out decades ago? We're so stupid, it all makes sense now!
Occam's (or Ockham's) razor does NOT say that the simplest explanation is probably the correct one. The principle prescribes that ontological entities are not to be multiplied beyond necessity. If a phenomenon can be explained without assuming the existence of an entity, then philosophers and scientists should not assume the entity's existence. We have evidence of evolution, we do not have evidence of the existence of a god.
As the great Greg House said, "Smaller, yes, but is one cause (god) simpler? Chase shows you a baby and says two mammals exchanged fluids, I tell you one stork dropped it off. Which is simpler?"
Thats not quite what Occams razor says but its close. The problem comes when you suggest God. It leads to which God, who made God, where did God live before creating this Universe and a ton of why and how questions.
"God created everything" isn't a theory, certainly not in the scientific sense. And no, your "goddidit" isn't the simplest explanation.
Where is your evidence any god did anything? "The natural world and everything in it" isn't evidence of creation, it's evidence of "a natural world and everything in it". And which god are we talking about? Even if there were evidence of a god doing something(there isn't), how do you know it's the god you want it to be?
No, your bible isn't evidence. It's the claim, not the evidence.
The "theory" that I created everything last Tuesday is simpler yet, but still doesn't make it true, even though it is.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
