Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!ut-sally!turpin
From: turpin@ut-sally.UUCP (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: sci.philosophy.tech
Subject: Re: Science and Aesthetics
Message-ID: <8727@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Aug-87 12:10:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: ut-sally.8727
Posted: Wed Aug 12 12:10:14 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 15-Aug-87 00:46:59 EDT
References: <120@snark.UUCP> <86@thirdi.UUCP> <8707@ut-sally.UUCP> <20070@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 31
Keywords: elegance beauty truth
Summary: What about Ockham's razor?

In article <20070@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>, kube@cogsci.berkeley.edu (Paul Kube) writes:
> In article <8707@ut-sally.UUCP> turpin@ut-sally.UUCP (Russell Turpin) writes:
> >Both of these criteria for elegance, namely parsimony of
> >assumptions and preference for general principles of symmetry or
> >invariance over the introduction of new forces, can strongly be
> >argued for on philosophical grounds. In short, scientists call
> >theories beautiful because they are more true, or at least, less
> >wrong. 
> 
> I find this paragraph a bit hard to parse, but if you're saying you
> know of strong philosophical arguments for simplicity or elegance of
> theories being diagnostic of truth, let's hear 'em...
> --Paul kube@berkeley.edu, ...!ucbvax!kube

Ockham's razor is a demand for parsimony of assumptions. Whether
or not one finds it compelling is a philosophic debate over which
much paper has been dirtied (and bits flipped.) But it is a
philosophic, as opposed to aesthetic, principle.

The term "simpler" is over-used and vague. In my original
posting, I made it clear that I was talking about two physical
theories which (a) had identical explanatory power and (b) one of
which required logically weaker physical assumptions (laws). In
short, the other theory is making physical assumptions that
provide no additional explanatory power. Since belief in physical
laws is justified (in many epistemologies) by reference to their
explanatory power (amongst other things), these extra assumptions
(putative laws) should be rejected. (This, of course, is just a
restatement of a strict version of Ockham's razor.)

Russell