(August 25, 2022 at 12:44 pm)Angrboda Wrote: Occam's razor doesn't apply to matters of choice as necessity doesn't constrain such choices. I think you're implying an inductive argument, instead, that the naive interpretation is more probable because it's the more frequent occurrence. If so, it's not at all clear that this is true. And there's nothing simpler about the naive interpretation. As to first person perspectives, much of fictional literature is written from such a perspective and is still fictional. And this isn't confined to the modern world as fiction isn't anything new. Take the plays of ancient Greece or any of numerous epic tales.
As far as your frequency comment, yes, I think the traditional or conservative position should always be the starting point. And even when a more liberal position is preferred, it is best to adopt it in response to, or opposition to, the standard or common position.
As for the razor, I think the principle of it still applies: I don't see the need to multiply authors unnecessarily if it isn't otherwise obvious or evident. It just adds more assumptions and becomes less verifiable in the process.
