Philosophy Finals
10) Can we use the Ockham's Razor to solve the controversy regarding - although many arguments do argue for the existence of God, they fail to establish the existence of a unique divine being?The Ockham’s Razor cannot satisfactorily address the problem of multiple deities. Attempting to use the Ockham’s Razor to solve this problem is an overly-simplistic approach that is not appropriate for the nature of the question.
The Ockham’s Razor asserts that good philosophy should be in its simplest form, and there should be no need to make anything more complicated than necessary. When used in the multiple-deity problem, the Ockham’s Razor can be used in this form:
> A system with a unique divine being is simpler compared to one that has multiple divine beings. Thus, according to Ockham’s Razor, multiple divine beings are not necessary and thus we should only accept one unique divine being.
Hume, in his remark, has addressed this issue to a certain extent. To summarise, his idea is that – although Ockham’s Razor might hold, there is still room to doubt that whether all the properties of God are that of one being only, or dispersed among several divine beings, and we cannot resolve this controversy with the ability that we have now.
I will discuss 2 ideas that are implicit in his remark.
1) A system with one divine being only is not necessarily simpler than a system with multiple divine beings.
> Hume discussed this – implicit in his remark is that, at least in the analogy that he stated, a system with multiple divine beings can be as simple as a system with only one unique divine being.
> Compare the Greek-Roman theological system and the Judeo-Christian theological system – it is not immediately clear which system is a simpler one.
> When we remove deities from a multiple-deity system and move towards a unique-divine being system, we are merely removing the quantity of deities
> A whole new set of problems, potentially even more complicated than before, can arise on the unique divine being
> Thus, removing the mere quantity of divine beings does not make the philosophical system simpler – there is a possibility that it can even become more complicated
> The Ockham’s Razor cannot be used this way – it has to be used holistically, not just removing mere quantities
2) Ockham’s Razor is a methodological paradigm; it cannot be used as an answer to a question.
> Hume said – we can’t ‘pretend that we can decide the controversy’.
> Using Ockham’s Razor to say that we should only accept one unique divine being, according to Hume, we are ‘pretending that we can decide the controversy’.
> It can be used as a way to form a theory, decide a mode of action, design tests to test theories – but it cannot be used as a conclusion.
> That is because, issues such as this (the multiple deities problem) demand some kind of truth, some kind of fact, as the conclusion
> Facts and truths cannot be decided by philosophical thought; they are facts and truths and will not change
> If we use Ockham’s Razor, a philosophical method, to decide on this fact, we risk error
> Thus, as long as we do not yet know for sure what is the absolute true answer to the multiple deities problem, there must be allowed room for doubt, as suggested by Hume
> Ockham’s Razor can be used to formulate tests and theories and gather evidence to test and seek the answer to the question, but we cannot use Ockham’s Razor to formulate an answer and decide that that is the answer.
Labels: Philosophy and Religion
