Ockham's Razor

Rating:
Summary: Reviews of Ockham's Razor
Review:

"Part travelogue, part philosophical treatise, part random musing -- perhaps it's more helpful to call it equal parts Plato, Robert Pirsig and Peter Mayle - it is a book of metaphysical rummaging, of thoughtful meandering." Globe and Mail newspaper

"delightful travel book-cum-philosophical exploration that will remind the reader of Robert Pirsig's eccentric 1970s classic, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance." Bronwyn Drainie, Author and critic

"In the tradition of Stephen Jay Gould and John Ralston Saul, Rowland's reasoned observations are a much-needed tonic." Chapters review

"This beautiful book tells us about values and about how important it is that we get back to them over and beyond our trust in science and rationality. Paradoxically, Ockham's Razor has healing power." Derrick de Kerchkhove, Director of the McLuhan Program in Culture and Technology

"This book makes us question the values at the very heart of contemporary thought." Norm Bolen, History Television

Rating:
Summary: philosophy of science 101
Review: First an approximate statement of the methodological rule of thumb known as Occam's Razor: given a set of hypotheses which treat an observed class of phenomena with equal 'fruitfulness', choose the 'simplest' one. Borrowing from Milton Friedman's adept definitions of the above technical terms, "a hypothesis is more 'fruitful' the more precise the resulting predictions," and "'simpler' the less the initial knowledge needed to make a prediction within a given field of phenomena."

Second, upon straightforward and simple examination, one can find what any theorist will tell you: the principle known as Occam's Razor is a purely arbitrary one, appealing and reasonable as it may sound (if you can't arrive at that conclusion directly, try to think of a reason why it should be true -- that is, that Occam's razor is not arbitrary, but definitive: congratulations, you'll have just discovered a proof by contradiction). There is no law of nature, no logically deducible reason -- indeed no reason at all -- to accept Occam's Razor as a valuable postulate in any choice of theory. It certainly hasn't held up empirically, and in fact some of the most important advances in human knowledge fly in its face: our understanding of the world of the very small (quantum physics), and the unimaginably immense (general relativity) are both prime examples of seemingly fantastic and certainly unintuitive explanations bearing the greatest theoretical 'fruit'. The perceptive reader will note that neither of those is an example of a falsification of Occam's Razor, since the reason the more complicated and less intuitive theories have supplanted antiquated simpler ones is because they predict better, NOT because they have more complicated assumptions. Thus, they are not even qualified for Occam's arbitrary test. The active reader may by now have guessed my criticism of this book: not only are the phenomena discussed in this book not eligible for a test by Occam's Razor -- arbitrary and meaningless as it would be even if they were -- they are willfully misrepresentative of the explanatory power of the theories Rowland seeks to discard. In brutally plain language, Rowland is either very ignorant of what the scientific community actually thinks and knows, or he is lying.

So it is with the above comments in mind that I warn prospective readers of Rowland's ideological pamphlet. For one, the book is riddled with anecdotal evidence and manipulations of the 'scientific side', two immediate disqualifications for any aspiring persuasive or objective work. Rowland obviously failed, as so many in his genre before him, to consult ANY authorities of the opposing viewpoint. I'm sure you can imagine what a pseudo-intellectual and uninformative sermon these devastating failings result in. My advice is, not only do not read this book (unless you want to understand why philosoph-evangelists like Rowland are wrong, though there might be better specimens for that task), but abandon the ignorance, refusal to consider (that means LISTEN to and UNDERSTAND) alternative viewpoints, and philosophical provincialism that unfortunately pervade virtually all of the creationist/evangelist/scientific-christian literature.

Call it an educated guess, but for just about all of you seriously thinking about buying this book, I'd be willing to bet you're guilty of at least one of the above intellectual vices. That's ok, everyone makes mistakes, and Jesus certainly isn't the only one willing to forgive upon repentance: intellectual salvation is at hand! If you want to understand the world, repent of your sins, and you will be saved. Let reason, consideration, and discovery into your heart. If you absolutely must read this book, make sure you understand why it's wrong. The you will be on the righteous path.

Rating:
Summary: Thought-provoking well-researched read
Review: I decided to get Ockham's Razor after reading Wade Rowland's most recent book "Galileo's Mistake".
Rowland's entertaining travel narrative mixes philosophical speculation with commentary about the food, architecture and art of France. If you've ever been to France or longed to visit, then you'll enjoy this book's combination of travel writing, philosophy and history. But be prepared, this book will make you question the values at the very heart of contemporary thought. Rowland's Ockham's Razor often reminded me of Robert Pirsig's eccentric 1970s classic, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance.

I was curious about Rowland's background and so I visited his official author website and learned he has a doctorate in culture and communication, and a masters in philosophy. It shows, as both of his books that I've read have been well-researched and clearly written.

Rating:
Summary: Philosphically and scientifically challenged.
Review: In this is fairly short book of about 260 pages Rowland touches on a wide range of subjects. With a family vacation to France as the backdrop for his narrative he discusses topics ranging from fine art and gastronomy to science, religion, philosophy, history and more. Presumably to keep the tone light and informal, Rowland frames his ideas using conversations with his beautiful, talented wife, his beautiful teenage daughter and his precocious fifteen year old son. In the same vein, he pontificates in letters to his house-sitter (one of his students) back in Canada.

This is a rambling and largely incoherent book - hardly a surprise given the range of topics and the length of the book. In apparent attempts at profundity, Rowland's vocabulary is frequently esoteric with a scholarly ring but the result is muddled, often incomprehensible ideas. For me, the overall effect was frustration bordering on exasperation.

If there is a single coherent theme in this book, it's the author's attitude towards science. While Rowland clearly has some acquaintance with science and technology he often lapses into pseudo-scientific, pseudo-intellectual bafflegab aimed at knocking `science' down a peg or two. This approach is in tune with teachings in vogue in many `cultural studies' faculties where science has been declared to be, at best, another 'social construct' with no universal principles (see quote below). Rowland would appear to be a victim and now a disciple of this unfortunate line of thinking.

In the end, it is possible that Rowland at least managed to achieve the goal stated in his subtitle "A search for wonder ....". He certainly left me wondering.

Quote re. postmodernist anti-science: the following quote from a 1994 address[1] by noted author and naturalist Edward O. Wilson provides a fairly apt description of Rowland's genre:

"Postmodernist critics present a Disney World representation of science, a fantasy of what science is, and how scientists work, and why they work, a distortion embellished variously by obsolete theories of psychoanalysis and the battle cries of political ideology. Within the academy, it seems to me that postmodernism and the divisive forms of multiculturalism are substantially a revolt of the proletariat, wherein second-rate scholarship is parlayed into tenured professorships and book contracts--not by quality, not by originality, but by claims of entitlement of race, gender, and moralistic ideologies."

Note 1. Keynote address, "Science and ideology" by E.O. Wilson, to the November 1994 convention of the National Association of Scholars in Cambridge, MA.

Rating:
Summary: Philosphically and scientifically challenged.
Review: In this is fairly short book of about 260 pages Rowland touches on a wide range of subjects. With a family vacation to France as the backdrop for his narrative he discusses topics ranging from fine art and gastronomy to science, religion, philosophy, history and more. Presumably to keep the tone light and informal, Rowland frames his ideas using conversations with his beautiful, talented wife, his beautiful teenage daughter and his precocious fifteen year old son. In the same vein, he pontificates in letters to his house-sitter (one of his students) back in Canada.

This is a rambling and largely incoherent book - hardly a surprise given the range of topics and the length of the book. In apparent attempts at profundity, Rowland's vocabulary is frequently esoteric with a scholarly ring but the result is muddled, often incomprehensible ideas. For me, the overall effect was frustration bordering on exasperation.

If there is a single coherent theme in this book, it's the author's attitude towards science. While Rowland clearly has some acquaintance with science and technology he often lapses into pseudo-scientific, pseudo-intellectual bafflegab aimed at knocking 'science' down a peg or two. This approach is in tune with teachings in vogue in many 'cultural studies' faculties where science has been declared to be, at best, another 'social construct' with no universal principles (see quote below). Rowland would appear to be a victim and now a disciple of this unfortunate line of thinking.

In the end, it is possible that Rowland at least managed to achieve the goal stated in his subtitle "A search for wonder ....". He certainly left me wondering.

Quote re. postmodernist anti-science: the following quote from a 1994 address[1] by noted author and naturalist Edward O. Wilson provides a fairly apt description of Rowland's genre:

"Postmodernist critics present a Disney World representation of science, a fantasy of what science is, and how scientists work, and why they work, a distortion embellished variously by obsolete theories of psychoanalysis and the battle cries of political ideology. Within the academy, it seems to me that postmodernism and the divisive forms of multiculturalism are substantially a revolt of the proletariat, wherein second-rate scholarship is parlayed into tenured professorships and book contracts--not by quality, not by originality, but by claims of entitlement of race, gender, and moralistic ideologies."

Note 1. Keynote address, "Science and ideology" by E.O. Wilson, to the November 1994 convention of the National Association of Scholars in Cambridge, MA.

Rating:
Summary: Provocative
Review: This book suggests that modern society is on the wrong track, and has been for at least 500 years - a startling and ambitious premise. A very interesting and provocative read, some of it misses, but much of it redounds. The distinctions between scientific and 'transactional' thought are useful and probing. The book not only deconstructs our notions of progress through science, but opens up other possibilities.

Rating:
Summary: Provocative
Review: This book suggests that modern society is on the wrong track, and has been for at least 500 years - a startling and ambitious premise. A very interesting and provocative read, some of it misses, but much of it redounds. The distinctions between scientific and 'transactional' thought are useful and probing. The book not only deconstructs our notions of progress through science, but opens up other possibilities.