Inspirational Poster – Occam’s Razor

December 15th, 2007 | Categories: Funny Stuff | Tags: , ,

Occam’s Razor

  1. salient
    December 15th, 2007 at 23:43
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Good one, and that’s only Christianity! There wouldn’t be room for all the other mythologies or all the creationisms.

  2. salient
    December 15th, 2007 at 23:46
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Me again. Just one small point — simpler is a tad misleading. Occam was actually talking more of not bringing in extra sub-explanations (much as Christian apologetics must) rather than mere simplicity. The simplest, and least useful, pseudoexplanation of all is goddidit.

  3. Brian
    December 16th, 2007 at 18:00
    Reply | Quote | #3

    TERRIBLE, have Atheism, Christianity and Science… and all the branches of science… this is such a bastardization of occam’s razor that this poster should be printed out and burned….

    • Joe
      November 8th, 2011 at 23:46
      Reply | Quote | #4

      Atheism is not a science…

      • Ian
        November 8th, 2011 at 23:50
        Reply | Quote | #5

        There’s nothing scientific about religion, nothing.

        Not believing in bullshit sounds pretty rational to me.

  4. Maark
    December 16th, 2007 at 18:12
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Brian, having science in there would make no sense!! The poster depicts two theories of the same thing: God.

    Science is theory of nature (including the universe), not whether God exists or not – however studying the universe definitely undermines most religious dogma… You see, atheism is just the natural way to go.

  5. Sven
    December 16th, 2007 at 18:26
    Reply | Quote | #7

    Being an atheist, I still find this poster wrong. Either the theory/explanation is the plain existance of god, and atheism as the simple denial of his existance is not what I would call a theory. Or the subject of the theory is not only wether or not god exists, but also his influences on the creation of earth. And since atheists should believe in the scientific explanations, and there are several theories, it’s hard to determine on of the views as “the simpler one”.

    • adam pate
      June 5th, 2011 at 01:41
      Reply | Quote | #8

      paintings are painted by a painter, sculpture is created by a sculptor.. atheism is a self limiting philosophy.. te be an atheist one is God..a violation of the Law of non contradiction..

      • Ian
        June 5th, 2011 at 08:51
        Reply | Quote | #9

        >atheism is a self limiting philosophy

        Being religious is enslavement as you must submit yourself to the whims and rules of your (non-existent) god.

      • June 5th, 2011 at 21:47

        adam pate :paintings are painted by a painter, sculpture is created by a sculptor.. atheism is a self limiting philosophy.. te be an atheist one is God..a violation of the Law of non contradiction..

        In order for a painter or a sculptor to create a painting or a sculpture, they would need materials. Otherwise, neither of the two can create a painting nor a sculpture. Ergo, you just committed a logical fallacy in the name of a god.

  6. bipolar2
    December 16th, 2007 at 19:12

    Don’t go all “fundie” out there. Ain’t y’all got no sense of humor. It’s meant to be funny, not illuminating. Stop with the literal interpretations already!

    I’ve never seen the branching heresies depicted so well. I’m downloading to save in my Atheism file.

    Thanks, bipolar2

  7. Patti
    December 16th, 2007 at 20:35

    There’s no need to go all fundie-crazy on this picture. It is meant to be humorous, but we all know fundies don’t have a sense of humor.

    All in all, I’ve been goin’ the simple lifestyle for 11 years (ex-catholic) and I’m damn proud.

  8. SierraBravo
    December 17th, 2007 at 11:30

    Great poster! However, the actual situation (about the upper part) is much more complex, with a great deal of fragmentation (and inter-faith cannibalization) in the last 300 years…where do Mormons, Baptists, Methodists, Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostals, Jehovah’s Witnesses and other cults figure in this?

  9. Ionan
    December 17th, 2007 at 19:19

    SierraBravo, I’d say that Mormon, Baptists, etc. all count under Protestantism, since they’re all splinter groups.

  10. The Shane
    December 19th, 2007 at 00:49

    I think I ended up laughing harder at the serious, uptight people, then the picture itself. :D Thanky ou, all, for amusing me! I shall be nice and not name names, though. :P

  11. matt
    December 20th, 2007 at 01:57

    with the vast amout of information and facts about the earth and space through such fields as archaeology, biology, astronomy, geology, genetics, anthropology, and paleontology, just to name a few of the fields of science, which disprove nearly all modern creationist theories it is really hard for me to fathom that 53% of americans believe in creationism. with the wealth of knowledge that is available to people today how can someone believe that “one little carbon organism [humans] in the backwaters of the milky way galaxy, can betray god”. to open your mind and accept knowledge over belief is the only path to true enlightenment and oneness with your life, knowledge is something that is known, belief is something that you imagine to be true.

    • adam pate
      June 5th, 2011 at 02:18

      one needs only to check evolution with archeology..evolution fails… i don t need the bible to disprove evolution.. randomness and physics tells us the progression of all things is toward less energy and more chaos..if evolution is correct, the universe has inconsistencies in one arena an absolutely precise mathematical harmony everywhere else…painters paint paintings, engineers build rockets and God built your universe.. nothing random about it at all..accident is a term that is not used to describe wrecks..they are collisions with a CAUSE

      • Ian
        June 5th, 2011 at 08:56

        painters paint paintings, engineers build rockets and God built your universe

        statement 1: true

        statement 2: true

        statement 3: absolute fabrication with no evidence whatsoever

        evolution fails… i don t need the bible to disprove evolution

        No, you need a whole lot more, and no one has provided any substantiative evidence disproving evolution. You fail.

  12. The Shane
    December 22nd, 2007 at 04:46

  13. The Shane
    December 22nd, 2007 at 04:47

    [IMG]http://i27.photobucket.com/albums/c195/TheOneTheOnlyTheShane/occamsrazor.gif[/IMG]

  14. Smokey99
    May 23rd, 2008 at 11:38

    I think Occams Razor applies well to Atheism.
    Not for the resons in the pic, but because.

    I truly believe the simplest explination that requires the fewist assumtions is usually the right one.
    The thought of an all knowing being or God, that conjures up incredibly complex systems involving miracles with the snap of a finger, is way more complex and requires many more assumptions than evolution.

    OK let the bible thumping begin.

    • adam pate
      June 5th, 2011 at 01:53

      one needs only to check evolution with archeology..evolution fails… i don t need the bible to disprove evolution.. randomness and physics tells us the progression of all things is toward less energy and more chaos..if evolution is correct, the universe has inconsistencies in one arena an absolutely precise mathematical harmony everywhere else…painters paint paintings, engineers build rockets and God built your universe.. nothing random about it at all..accident is a term that is not used to describe wrecks..they are collisions with a CAUSE

      • Ian
        June 5th, 2011 at 08:56

        If you copy/paste your response again, I’ll delete the reply. I don’t like spam.

      • June 5th, 2011 at 21:50

        First, you need to prove us that “god” exists — and which one that is.

      • oisin
        October 2nd, 2012 at 16:07

        actually the cause its whats known as pure chance and if you want your god there it is. chance and luck

  15. Smokey99
    May 23rd, 2008 at 11:39

    Wow I need to start using spell check :-(

  16. HehHeh
    September 14th, 2009 at 18:35

    To be more accurate, the atheist side should have just 2 brances. Old atheism, and neo-atheism. One who simply disbelieves in God, and one that almost makes it a religion to disbelieve.

    • oisin
      October 2nd, 2012 at 16:05

      well yes but the neo-atheism isnt tecnically atheism, its more setting up one organisation to take down an older more powerful organisation.

  17. Patches
    May 25th, 2011 at 03:03

    Yep, all atheists are the same and think the same. Sure does me justice to say that when I became an atheist, I joined a group where everyone has the exact same train of thought as the rest of the people who don’t believe in a god.

    Of course, I don’t see how the Christians having different viewpoints on the topic of their faith takes away any of their legitimacy.

    • Ian
      May 25th, 2011 at 07:32

      Atheism is ‘not believing in gods’, there’s really nothing else to it. Your other world views and philosophies are not related.

  18. adam pate
    June 5th, 2011 at 01:37

    Lightning takes the simplest and easiest path due to its nature.. it s created intrinsic nature… that does not mean it could not in a different set of parameters act differently..i e.. religion rooted in the facts available in 30000 documents point in one direction.. you may disagree with a conclusion but not the validity of archeology and independent corroborative documents..course that would require the use of actual investigative intelligence and an open mind…yes i said those things .. intelligence and openess..

    • Ian
      June 5th, 2011 at 08:53

      That was the longest most incoherent sentence I’ve ever read.