Ockham’s Razor

My dearest X,

Somewhere back in the 14^th Century, William Ockham wrote: “Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily.”  This notion is now referred to as “Ockham’s razor.”  And we have been struggling to comply with this philosophy ever since. 

The common, if not terrifyingly simple, interpretation of Ockham’s reasoning is that at any point where competing ideas or theories are found to make the same conclusion or explanation of something, the simplest theory should be adopted and the other left behind to flounder in the dust.

I am not opposed to simple.  I am good at simple.

Scientists have applied Ockham’s razor at various points to whittle away at over-complication in the circus of theoretical studies that ever surround us.  Even today, guided by this principle, physicists are seeking a “Grand Unified Theory” that will glue together gravity, electromagnetic force, strong nuclear force, and weak nuclear force in theory that explains everything.

Well, as they say, we ain’t there just yet.

And, X, what of us?  Our lives have become far from simple.

What do either reflective theories or empirical foundations have to do with my desire hold your wrist as we step stone-to stone across a meadow stream or my wish to shield you from ocean spray with my outstretched jacket?

And here is this:  Whether 10 feet away or 10,000 miles apart, we are still apart.  I don’t want to be apart. 

What if, in one theory, I decide that I adore you and I take your hand into mine in some public place?

What if, in another theory, I lean over and kiss you.

Which of these do you think is the simplest?

Which might I choose?

--Mitchell Hegman