tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post4750335538779846178..comments2023-10-08T15:51:17.426+00:00Comments on Beyond Necessity: Mencken on crowdsourcingEdward Ockhamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-24456591582962097112011-08-18T16:08:04.467+00:002011-08-18T16:08:04.467+00:00>> your assertion is nearly vacuous.
Not re...>> your assertion is nearly vacuous.<br /><br />Not really, there are plenty of people, and I argue with them a lot of the time, who feel that nothing is quite in order until they have made it sufficiently complicated for their tastes.<br /><br />>>you need to guard against the common error of "this is a simple explanation, that is a complex one , therefore this is correct".<br /><br />Reading ‘better’ for ‘correct’, I would say this is not an error, <i>so long as actually is an explanation</i>. A dragon (or a ghost) “explanation” is not an <i>explanation</i>.Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-4499608754152760942011-08-18T14:34:38.725+00:002011-08-18T14:34:38.725+00:00Don't worry, I'm watching (http://www.yout...Don't worry, I'm watching (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tt7zD9p80gA).<br /><br />Certainly I agree, but your assertion is nearly vacuous. Also, it provides no guidance for how simple an explanation a given situation requires. In particular, you need to guard against the common error of "this is a simple explanation, that is a complex one, therefore this is correct".William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-34909286123167320362011-07-27T12:41:02.819+00:002011-07-27T12:41:02.819+00:00Glad to see you are still with us, Belette, I thou...Glad to see you are still with us, Belette, I thought we had lost you.<br /><br />In answer to your point: an explanation should be as simple as possible, but no simpler than the facts require. I.e. no more, and no less, than is necessary.<br /><br />Do you agree?Edward Ockhamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07583379503310147119noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21308815.post-46668323049971863642011-07-27T09:09:17.662+00:002011-07-27T09:09:17.662+00:00Or of those who seek a simple answer to complex su...Or of those who seek a simple answer to complex subjects such as GW?William M. Connolleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05836299130680534926noreply@blogger.com