Reply #218: This is a very interesting and thought-provoking post. Much to consider.

[tom_paine]

You are correct that Occam's razor, even where it is used on human or sociopolitical endeavors, STILL works most of the time.

As Andrea stated below, your fallacy here as it applies to human sociopolitics is the comment that data is generally not missing.

While this is true for experimental science, is is much much MUCH more often false when dealing with human power structures and hierarchies. Therein lies the single most important reason behind my initial corollary.

One might express it this way As human societies become less free, the amount of critical data withheld rises in direct proportion, making the use of Occam's razor more problematic in the absence of the full data set.

I also agree with you that my posts have become progressively "less logical" as we have gone forward from my first corollary posted. The reason for that is that I am trying to describe an inherently illogical phenomena, human hierarchical power structures and how they function to gain and hold unchecked power.

This is in and of itself part of our primate nature, which we have not even come close to overcoming. So at it's heart it is basically illogical.

Using logic to describe illogical workings is always difficult.

Where we disagree is that it is unusual for information to be withheld. I believe it is much more closer to the norm (though somewhere in between) and that in and of itself is proportional to the openness and freedom of a society.

Finally, another thing which poisons and weakens the modern use of Occam's Razor (again let me say it is still an incredibly effective tool in many situations nonetheless) is the massive orders of magnitude in the sciences of psychology, PR, advertising and marketing...perceptiona nd mental control, really.

These give the hierarchical power structures the ability to micromanage which is the keystone piece of data which will lead to a predetermined conclusion in their "target audience". This way, 99% of the data is released, but the 1% of the data that is missing is key to the full understanding of the dataset.

It gives the power structure (whichever self-interested segment we are talking about depends on the given issue) the ability to say, "Look, we've given you all the data," and the fact that only a tiny but keystone piece is missing makes it very difficult to uncover.

But I am again digressing, falling down the rabbit-hole of trying to describe systems that are inherently illogical and self-interested, to say the least.

All I can do here is wrap up and reiterate that it sure would be nice if humanity behaved logically and forthrightly, that Occam's razor could be used with 100% efficiency, that critical data was never withheld rather than often withheld from the common people.

But it isn't. Hence, my lapse as I try to flesh out the illogical.

You think the deep and convoluted explanations behind Watergate were the most logical and simplest. I submit that G. Gordon Liddy proposing cruise ships full of hookers and the assassination of Jack Anderson, let alone his whole serious of crazy illogical and convoluted plots were among the least simple and most sliceable by Occam's razor. But Nixon and his bunch were also illogical, driven mad by power lust, so as crazy and complex the watergate machinations, they turned out to be true.

AND critical data was withheld as long as possible to confuse any neutral observer trying to analyze the situation with Occam's razor.

Finally, I chose the the Holocaust because the extremity of the situation deeply highlighted t he points I was trying to make, but I think you are in error if you assume I chose them because they were the only events these could be applied to. Their extremity brought out my points into stark relief.

Whew! My fingers are tired. It's almost time to just agree to disagree.