Stick to simple! (Occam’s razor)

According to Occam’s razor, when we are faced with multiple theories, we should stick to the simplest one.

IMG_9313.PNG


All of my life, I’ve been a really strong believer in this hypothesis testing theory even when it come down to spiritual topics. There are more assumptions (the hypothesis is less simple) if you believe that there is a creator. So it was easier for me to believe that religion is just a cultural construct created to teach morals and ethics. But then, I did my accident.


The accident itself wasn’t the excruciating part, the recovery was! I only had my bed and my thoughts. I said that the only way human can think is through logic. Logic is finding a link between cause and consequence. A cause is everything in time that comes before a consequence. A consequence is everything that comes in time after a cause. So time is essential for their existence. This implies that if time is out of the equation, we can’t use logic. At the creation, it’s illogical to use logic!

2 thoughts on “Stick to simple! (Occam’s razor)

  1. Dear Chadi,

    Your blog is a nice way for you to spend time and extricate dullness from the equation of everyday life.

    This being said, i beg to disagree with you on several fronts; I shall start with the basic premise:

    Religion, since you chose to start with that; religion is not the most important part of a believer’s creed: it simply is a way to regulate one’s relation with the Creator, if the Creator exists; without a creator, there is no place for religions; whereas without religions, the Creator can much more easily be understood.

    Start with the basic premise: the Darwinian theory of evolution. Darwin alleges that it (creation, the world, etc) started with a single atom, a mono cell which, under the influence of the environment, muted/ evolved into a double cell, and so on, leading up to the existence of the different species, of which mankind is one.

    But if all started with a mono cell, does it not come to mind to wonder who “created”, manufactured, made that cell?? Thus obviating the need for a Creator who must have started everything.

    Did Darwin wonder how was the “environment” made to exist?? I don’t recall reading about this, but there too, one would find that there is a need for someone who started the whole thing up.

    When we started studying physics and chemistry in high school, the first principle that stuck to my brain is the LAVOISIER principle: the conservation of mass: “rien ne se cree, rien ne se perd, tout se retrouve”. In other words, transformation is possible, but not disappearance; thus, for something to have existed, someone must have consciously “created” it.

    Once you admit that a Creator is a necessary concept, religions are a mere corollary; different people interpret things differently; thus the different religions. But the important concept is the existence/ non existence of a Creator; the religion is a by product.

    All the best

    1. Focusing on Lavoisier and making his theory as a basis to our arguments contradicts science’s evolution. Simply put, he states that everything has a cause. but in modern physics, things can happen without a cause (microphysics). This very thing goes against “rien ne se cree, rien ne se perd, tout se retrouve”. So having a world that came through “chance” is a possibility!

Leave a Reply