Hello everyone
This month, I want to talk about Occam’s Razor.
What is Occam’s Razor?
Wikipedia explains Occam’s Razor succinctly:
…when presented with competing hypotheses about the same prediction and both hypotheses have equal explanatory power, one should prefer the hypothesis that requires the fewest assumptions
It’s not uncommon to see Occam’s Razor reduced to a straightforward proposition: the simplest solution is usually right.
In fiction and drama
So why am I talking about Occam’s Razor?
Well…first, because I think it’s an interesting notion (more of which in a moment). But secondly, because it gets mentioned in fiction and (more so) in drama. Indeed, in so many TV cops shows, there’s a common exchange:
veteran detective, shrugging as they straighten, having bent over to examine a dead body, talking to no one in particular: “Occam’s Razor.”
younger detective, clearly reeling from what they’ve just seen: “Who’s razor…what’s that?”
veteran detective, wearily, but still with a kindly tone coming from decades of experience: “Let me explain…”
When this exchange happens (and a variant of it always does when Occam’s Razor is mentioned in a drama), its inclusion often feels rather irksome, not least because the Razor then needs to be explained. And having explained the Razor—usually poorly—the notion is never mentioned again.
It would be far simpler for the veteran detective to simply say: “the simplest explanation is usually right” so then the junior detective could ask the veteran to explain that simple explanation, thereby moving the story forward.
And for some reason, the Razor is always presented as something close to scientific fact, when a Razor is more of a rule of thumb. But Occam’s rule of thumb just doesn’t seem so compelling.
Why do we care about Occam’s Razor?
While Occam’s Razor is becoming a bad cliché in drama, the underlying principle is still interesting. And for me, it’s not so much the Razor that interests—although, I find the notion compelling—it’s the thought process that the Razor imposes.
In applying the Razor to a number of competing propositions, there are two aspects that must be considered:
The first consideration is: do the propositions have equal explanatory power?
So often, with two (or more) possible explanations for a scenario, one proposition will explain the matter, but the other won’t…or won’t as fully. I would go as far as saying that trying to identify two explanations which have equal explanatory power is nearly impossible.
The second consideration is the underlying assumptions—and very often this leads us back to the strength (in terms of explanatory power) of a proposition. When you look at a proposition and analyze what is knowledge and what are assumptions, often knowledge is revealed to be a combination of misunderstandings and incomplete/uncontextualized facts. And with that new/revised understanding, one of the competing explanations often crumbles.
So while I’m a believer in Occam’s Razor, in practice, I have found it really hard to apply the Razor for the simple reason that it’s nearly (but not totally) impossible to develop two (or more) competing explanations which have equal explanatory power. In other words, there’s usually only one reasonable explanation.
And—for me—the power of Occam’s Razor is that you can never really apply it, but trying to apply it makes you think harder.
So why…?
So why does Occam’s Razor still appear so readily in fiction (and especially drama)?
Cynically, I might suggest Occam’s Razor was first mentioned by an author or screenwriter trying to show off and let us see how intelligent they were.
Slightly less cynically, it might be for characterization. The author/screenwriter is showing us that this character is knowledgeable and thoughtful. It’s not every detective that can quote a fourteenth-century philosopher. And to be clear, I am still cynical here because—if there is a misapplication of the Razor—the detective is showing us their ignorance/stupidity, not their intelligence.
But maybe there’s a simpler answer which might make fewer assumptions (see what I did there): drama is about withholding details and misdirecting the reader/viewer. If the detective is pointing in one direction or making you think in a certain way, then maybe you’re going to miss the clue.
Until March
That’s me for this month. In leaving, I must apologize: you’re now going to start noticing people talking about Occam’s Razor in fiction and drama.
I’ll be back in March. Until then.
All the best
Simon