Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

Journal Article

On the role of simplicity in science

Luigi Scorzato
Synthese
Vol. 190, No. 14 (September 2013), pp. 2867-2895
Published by: Springer
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/24021415
Page Count: 29
Were these topics helpful?
See somethings inaccurate? Let us know!

Select the topics that are inaccurate.

Cancel
  • Download ($43.95)
  • Add to My Lists
  • Cite this Item
On the role of simplicity in science
Preview not available

Abstract

Simple assumptions represent a decisive reason to prefer one theory to another in everyday scientific praxis. But this praxis has little philosophical justification, since there exist many notions of simplicity, and those that can be defined precisely strongly depend on the language in which the theory is formulated. The language dependence is a natural feature—to some extent—but it is also believed to be a fatal problem, because, according to a common general argument, the simplicity of a theory is always trivial in a suitably chosen language. But, this trivialization argument is typically either applied to toy-models of scientific theories or applied with little regard for the empirical content of the theory. This paper shows that the trivialization argument fails, when one considers realistic theories and requires their empirical content to be preserved. In fact, the concepts that enable a very simple formulation, are not necessarily measurable, in general. Moreover, the inspection of a theory describing a chaotic billiard shows that precisely those concepts that naturally make the theory extremely simple are provably not measurable. This suggests that—whenever a theory possesses sufficiently complex consequences—the constraint of measurability prevents too simple formulations in any language. This explains why the scientists often regard their assessments of simplicity as largely unambiguous. In order to reveal a cultural bias in the scientists' assessment, one should explicitly identify different characterizations of simplicity of the assumptions that lead to different theory selections. General arguments are not sufficient.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[2867]
    [2867]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2868
    2868
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2869
    2869
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2870
    2870
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2871
    2871
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2872
    2872
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2873
    2873
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2874
    2874
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2875
    2875
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2876
    2876
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2877
    2877
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2878
    2878
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2879
    2879
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2880
    2880
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2881
    2881
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2882
    2882
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2883
    2883
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2884
    2884
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2885
    2885
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2886
    2886
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2887
    2887
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2888
    2888
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2889
    2889
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2890
    2890
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2891
    2891
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2892
    2892
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2893
    2893
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2894
    2894
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2895
    2895