Occam’s razor isn’t a rule. It’s specifically for proof of God in a medieval philosophy context and is the observation that if you need a very convoluted theory on which a much simpler hypothesis also fits, the simpler one is more likely.
However it doesn’t state that the simpler solution must be true.
I didn’t say anything about the simpler solution having to be true? Having complicated and interconnected answers to simple unrelated questions is an indicaior of a conspiracy theorist, and Occam’s razor gets that point across without spelling it out
Occam’s razor isn’t a rule. It’s specifically for proof of God in a medieval philosophy context and is the observation that if you need a very convoluted theory on which a much simpler hypothesis also fits, the simpler one is more likely.
However it doesn’t state that the simpler solution must be true.
I didn’t say anything about the simpler solution having to be true? Having complicated and interconnected answers to simple unrelated questions is an indicaior of a conspiracy theorist, and Occam’s razor gets that point across without spelling it out
You said ‘ignoring Occams razor’, as if that invalidates any hypothesis. And it doesn’t
However I have but that technicality to spell out, I’m not implying the truth of the matter either.
I’m just crusading about the misunderstanding of the use of Occams razor, I’m not trying to undermine your comment.