EN BG

Occam's Razor

Between competing explanations, start with the one that needs the fewest assumptions. But don't stop there.

Occam's Razor says that when two explanations account for the same evidence, the simpler one is more likely correct. It is a useful starting point. If your car won't start, check the battery before suspecting sabotage. If a politician contradicts themselves, consider incompetence before assuming a grand strategy. Most of the time, the straightforward explanation holds up.

But Occam's Razor is a heuristic, not a law. Reality is not obligated to be simple. The 2008 financial crisis involved deliberate coordination between rating agencies, banks, and regulators that would have sounded paranoid if you described it in 2006. The tobacco industry really did fund decades of fake research. Sometimes the complicated explanation is the correct one — and dismissing it as "too complex" is just intellectual laziness wearing the mask of rigour.

The misuse works like this: someone raises a disturbing possibility backed by evidence, and the response is "that's too convoluted — the simpler explanation is X." But simplicity only wins when it accounts for all the evidence. If the simple explanation leaves major facts unexplained, clinging to it isn't rational. It's comfortable. Occam's Razor is meant to guide your starting point, not shut down your inquiry. Use it to begin thinking, not to stop.

References