> sam makes an unwarranted number of assumptions, and as such must be cut away with occam's razor.
I agree with you that the logical thing to do with my answer is to cut it away with Occam's razor, and I don't blame you for it.
However, it should be noted that Occam's razor is a general rule of thumb, not some infallible law.
If you were handed a piece of paper with a high level description of how the universe truly works, would you recognize it as the truth or dismiss it as the ramblings of a lunatic?
If you went back in time even a few hundred years and handed the most brilliant thinkers of the day a piece of paper containing just one paragraph about general relativity, how many of those slips of paper would survive Occam's razor?
I agree with you that the logical thing to do with my answer is to cut it away with Occam's razor, and I don't blame you for it.
However, it should be noted that Occam's razor is a general rule of thumb, not some infallible law.
If you were handed a piece of paper with a high level description of how the universe truly works, would you recognize it as the truth or dismiss it as the ramblings of a lunatic?
If you went back in time even a few hundred years and handed the most brilliant thinkers of the day a piece of paper containing just one paragraph about general relativity, how many of those slips of paper would survive Occam's razor?