Occam's Razor Answers

Improved Essays
2. My answer for this question, the explanation that is the easiest to understand is the best explanation, is wrong because the explanation that is without the extra assumptions should be preferred, even though it might not be the easiest to understand. Occam's Razor centers around this idea that if you hear hoof beats think horse, not zebra. A horse should first come to mind because it is the most likely explanation and more commonly found to be the answer. I honestly think the wording tripped me up for this question. (Prior knowledge of Occam's Razor form zoology with Dr. Engman.)
3. My answer is wrong because the Principle of Sufficient Reason states that "there must be an explanation of the existence of any being and of any positive fact

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    Reply to Objection 1: Parmenides, your notion of being is too strong. When it comes to the definition of being you provided, the idea that being cannot change is incorrect. Being can change while remaining the same, so the notion of something coming to be or passing away with change, would be incorrect, as I have stated in my response and given examples. Through potential and matter, nothing is coming to be or passing away, because it is still the same substance throughout. The form of the substance always had the potential to become the change, so nothing is coming to be and the substance is not passing away, but rather staying the same.…

    • 556 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Occam’s razor and Hickam’s dictum, when used in medicine, seek to diagnose patients and understand their symptoms’ origin. Their difference lies in their effectiveness. Occam’s razor uses the idea that the simplest answer is the most likely. Under Occam’s razor, patients exhibiting multiple symptoms will be diagnosed with one rare disease instead of multiple common ones, as it is simpler to do so. Hickam’s dictum, however, allows patients to be diagnosed with the statistically more probable case of multiple diseases, despite its higher complexity.…

    • 277 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    There is one prevailing question each of us ask ourselves consistently, “Does God exist?” Even though people’s responses are different, nearly all responses are contingent upon one’s beliefs, experiences, and influences. Despite the lack of knowledge, God is known to be an all-loving, all-powerful, and creator of all things in most communities, but those qualities are often questioned by scientists and philosophers. The existence of God was significantly debated among philosophers during the 18th and 19th centuries, however, each esteemed philosopher had a distinct argument explaining their rationale, while criticizing another’s. In this paper, I will analyze William Paley’s, teleological argument, which is the argument for the existence of…

    • 848 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Craig that he is “the one Christian apologist who seems to have put the fear of God into many of my fellow atheist.” In this debate the same will occur for my opponent and all reading. Argument 1: Kalam Cosmological argument (KCA) (Heavily influenced by Dr. Craig’s presentation on the subject) P1: Whatever begins to exist has a cause “Nihil fit ex nihilo” That is to say that nothing comes from nothing.…

    • 542 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I will then restate each argument in terms of how it is supported in context, being sure to identify which claims are most supported by evidence and thus the most relevant. Here, then, I will be arguing that…

    • 1170 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Cosmological Argument

    • 2037 Words
    • 9 Pages

    In the middle of the 17th century, thinkers in the enlightenment began to question how belief in the existence of a monotheistic God could be rationally supported. A number of arguments for and against the existence of God emerged at this time, and while the philosophical debate on the existence of God is still in session, the initial dust has settled. At this point in time, it is abundantly clear that a the cosmological argument is untenable at both a metaphysical and empirical level, and that the various versions of the cosmological argument fail to support the existence of God. There is good reason for critically examining the cosmological argument. Theists have made a claim that God exists.…

    • 2037 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this essay, I will be examining the different views pertaining to the cosmological argument for the existence of God as discussed by Bertrand Russell and Fr. Copleston. I will be agreeing with Lord Russell’s views that the cosmological argument has a few inherent problems and contradictions that are difficult to overcome. First, I will look at Russell's assessment on his points of necessary and analytic propositions as well as his belief that Copleston’s argument on contingency is a fallacy of composition. I will then concur with these ideas and offer my thinking as to why this opinion is more convincing than its counterpart.…

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The Problem of Evil argument focuses on the fact the existence of evil in the universe contradicts with God’s existence. I challenge the soundness of the argument, especially two particular premises which deal with omnipotence and omnibenevolence. The argument is largely considered a valid or logical argument. To examine the validity of the argument, it is necessary, first, to define the term “God” in the argument.…

    • 997 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    First Cause Argument

    • 1578 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Does the First Cause Argument successfully show that God exists? Introduction: The First Cause Argument is a valid argument in my opinion, and in this essay I will attempt to show the reader that the argument is in fact valid, as well as showing that the premises are true, which leads to the First Cause Argument being sound. By doing this I hope to convince the reader to accept that the First Cause Argument successfully shows that God exists.…

    • 1578 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In this paper, I will explain the rationale of the cosmological argument and it’s objections as presented by Hume in the Dialogues Concering Natural Religion. My conclusion is that the cosmological argument ultimately fails to prove the existence of a self-caused being. I will show that is unreasonable to claim that there need be an explanation for the whole infinite series of a cause and effect chain. The character Demea primarily says that everything has a reason and utilizes this fundamental claim to prove the existence of a deity.…

    • 849 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    According to Abrahamic religion belief there is Being, God, who is the sole creator of the universe, and every single thing occurs the way he wants it. God (Allah) has no gender, because of that I will use both pronoun He/She to refer to God. There are three major attributes about God; omnipotent, omniscient and omnibenevolent. Now, we need to find out what each of the three terms mean? Omnipotent means a being, God, who has unlimited power.…

    • 596 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I felt the argument was needed to question the creationist that, “Did he create to mimic evolution and test our faith thereby?” (Gould, 256). In his last argument, he not only proves the evidence of evolution in an efficient way, by pointing out fossil records and evolved features, but also by questioning the logic to why God would add more revolutionary features to organisms over the…

    • 1002 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    I believe that “The Cosmological Argument” for God is still quite valid, my reasons for defending this argument have been produced after a great deal of reflection on the matter, I have concluded that the argument is still quite useful. To best describe the argument, it is the conclusion that “nothing comes from nothing” as was stated by St. Aquinas, in other words God must exist because if there was nothing then we needed something to “call it into existence” so to speak. This coincides perfectly with the Law of Causality, which is widely believed by both scientists and philosophers alike and is the belief that every event must have a cause, treating every event like a domino effect. I have to defend this argument because I have made my own…

    • 890 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In order to explain something, we need evidence, however; this evidence cannot support itself without other evidence; henceforth, we gain this evidence through the…

    • 780 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    In “Why This? Why Anything?” Derek Parfit provides his demonstration of the fallibility of providing causal answers for the creation of the universe. In light of the fallibility of causal answers, Parfit seeks to incorporate his response to the creation of the universe with the use of non-causal answers which explains something’s existence in virtue of its properties, rather than attempting to follow an infinite chain of reasoning. While Parfit adequately demonstrates an inability to conform our reasoning to causal interactions for the creation and nature of the universe, his understanding of non-causal answers for the nature of the universe provides little insight into the questions he proposes and provides merely a factual understanding, rather than an explanatory one.…

    • 1272 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays