(February 18, 2018 at 7:44 am)notimportant1234 Wrote:(February 18, 2018 at 7:40 am)Grandizer Wrote: I don't see "postulated" anywhere in the intro, at least not with reference to "scientific theory". But even if it is in there somewhere, it would be more appropriate to say that they are established through repeated testing of its predictive and explanatory power, but I guess you can also say "postulated" given a certain context and/or interpretation (such as theories postulate this and that). But it's not generally just an educated guess (like a scientific hypothesis).
I do see your point , I may have missused "postulated". But my objection was that the one who used it described is an instrument of logic, wich is not why Occam's razor is used.
If I would use Occam's Razors in this topic I will use it to chose a religion not if it is true or false . Using it the prefered religion would be Deism because it makes the fewest asumptions.
That's not true. Occam's razor can be used as both a nonscientific and a scientific tool of logic. Really, all the principle of parsimony is about is that the simpler explanation/theory/hypothesis, among competing explanations/theories/hypotheses, is the most reasonable explanation, given all else equal (which is practically impossible AFAIK), and simplicity being in terms of the number of assumptions made.
Of course, in practice, this is not always the most effective tool of logic to rely on. But theoretically, it makes sense.
If there's one thing I would disagree with AFTT47, it's that "no explanation" or "I don't know" is not an explanation, so you can't ever call it a "winner" among "competing" explanations, even in terms of parsimony, simply because it isn't even an attempt to explain what can be observed.
Also, deism doesn't make fewer assumptions than naturalism. Given deism, an extra entity is assumed, unlike with naturalism. But yes, if comparing to other theistic beliefs, then yes, deism would probably be the most parsimonious explanation.