Occam score

A score which can be used to assess the relative credibility of scientific explanations of a set of phenomena, even when one or more of the explanations do not account fully for the phenomena. See /narratives/the-Occam-method.

Credibility and proof

Submitted by jhwierenga on Mon, 07/30/2018 - 07:36
Knowledge, as defined by the Stanford Dictionary of Philosophy, is justified true belief. This definition, unfortunately, is of no operational use, given that we can never know with absolute certainty if a proposition is true. We therefore abandon the notion of knowledge, and concentrate on credibility instead. A proposition is credible to the extent that it is reasonable to act on the assumption that it is true. There is a scale of credibility. A proposition is maximally credible if we can use it to produce new information on which we can rely without further thought, and minimally credible if we can use it only to identify possible courses of action, the credibility of which must be verified independently of the source before being acted on. QO has a heuristic by means of which credibility can be assessed - the Occam Method. ...

The Occam Method

Submitted by jhwierenga on Mon, 07/30/2018 - 07:30

Scoring

QO is founded on a heuristic, the Occam method, which is based on Occam’s razor: the contention that, given a set of otherwise equivalent explanations, the explanation requiring the fewest apparently arbitrarily contrived elements is to be preferred. It is a method for deriving and evaluating an explanation tree. In QO, we apply the Occam method to determine in which sequence in which hypotheses about the universe should be examined.