Why it is Fine to Repurpose Occam’s Razor
Yes, His Nominalism isn’t Really About Eliminating Unnecessary Assumptions. So?
William of Ockam was a theologian who posited ‘Numquam panenda est pluralitas sine necessitate,’ normally translated as ‘Don’t make unnecessary assumptions when looking for a cause.’ He probably didn’t mean it exactly as we use it, but that doesn’t matter.
He Didn’t Invent the Idea Behind the Phrase
He actually was rewording the phrase from Duns Scotus, another scholar from the time. And Duns Scotus was paraphrasing someone else. The idea actually goes back to Aristotle.
This is a case of a lot of people saying the same thing, but one person’s formulation surviving out of meme-ability. Thomas Aquinas and Durand de Saint-Pourcain said something similar, but William of Ockam was particularly pithy and vociferous in spreading it. The most quotable version was a paraphrase of Ockam’s saying, made by John Ponce in the 1600’s.
It Has Little To Do With Nominalism
Okham was a theologian and was ruminating on how to divide information. His big thought was that universal categories don’t have any backing in reality, and that there are only individual things with certain features in common. The phrase, “A plurality should never be posited unless necessary,” in context, refers to that.
The term we normally use, ‘Entities are not to be multiplied beyond what is necessary,’ isn’t even really directly saying what we mean: ‘give more weight to solutions that require the least number of assumptions.’ Practically, we tend to use it to mean, ‘don’t propose a conspiracy or supernatural cause when a material one will do.’
Occam’s Razor is a Handy Way of Conserving Time
Look, when you are trying to solve a problem, you don’t have ages to contemplate every possibility. Eliminating the possibility that your car’s brake failure is caused by marshmallow-fluff kitty conspiracies takes precious time from replacing your brake. You can skip the hassle by saying, “Accepting the idea of Marshmallow-fluff kitties conspiracies requires a bunch of assumptions that aren’t backed by proof. We don’t have to assume that brake pads wear thin. We have plenty of concrete proof of brake wear. So, let’s go to the known causes of brake failure that we have evidence for and eliminate those before we start conjuring with marshmallow-fluff kitties.”
The drawback here is if you believe in the marshmallow-fluff kitty conspiracy. You think that the visions people had of marshmallow-fluff kitties are evidence, and that you personally have beheld one. Well, now that is a possibility you should pursue. But the visions and your personal experience were mistaken, and now you are spending hours chasing the marshmallow-fluff kitties instead of fixing your brake.
Still, in other, non-marshmallow-fluff related circumstances, you will narrow down your search to proven and likely answers. People like to point to the unusual circumstances, but that is because it makes an interesting story. Nine times out of ten, brakes squeak because they are worn, so save yourself time by eliminating that possibility first. It gives you a statistical chance of being right earlier, before your car crashes or costs you millions.
So, citing Occam’s Razor is not necessarily the most historically accurate thing in this scenario, but it is a handy way of explaining why you are not persuaded of something. Language is changed by how it is used, and it is used in a way that is useful to speakers. It’s the same deal as the phrase ‘When you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras.”
In Reference to Medieval Scholars
To use another shorthand quote that is handy, “We all stand on the shoulders of giants.” Medieval scholars took Aristotle and other Greek thinkers, amended it to work for them, and then Early Modern scholars took their results and modified it to their needs, which we have bent to our needs in our turn. New things come out of the process, and we take what we need.
Sources:
Nominalism Definition & Meaning — Merriam-Webster
Podcast: Philosophy Without any Gaps Hop 272- A Close Shave — Ockham’s Nominalism