35 Burst results for "Razor"

S.A. Cosby on 'Razorblade Tears'

The Book Review

02:08 min | 2 weeks ago

S.A. Cosby on 'Razorblade Tears'

"As a cosby joins us now from southeastern virginia gloucester specifically he is the author of the new book razor blade. Tears also blacktop wasteland. And a few other books sean. Thanks for being here. Thank you so much. Haven't usa pleasure. So this is a spoiler free. Podcast i just want to say that front because this is a book that is full of really unexpected. But well earned plot twists. Give us the premise of razor blade. Tears basically reasonably tears the story of two one black one white both ex-cons whose sons on mary and at the beginning of the book. Unfortunately these two sons murdered and these two fathers who will never accepting of their son's sexuality decided to investigate the crime when be lease investigation stalls and in doing so they are trying to achieve thinned for their sons but also i think trying to get redemption for themselves in the ways. They weren't there for their children in life. They're attempting to be there for them in death. Let's talk a little bit more specifically about those two anti hero. Heroes you've got buddy lee jenkins and slash riot randolph. Who are they. They are men of certain age that come with a certain amount of baggage. Because of that age they are both hard scrabble. Southern men who are more alike in have more in common than either one of them could imagine but they're also meant that i think are internally broken in a way that precluded him being able to communicate their sons and i think hinder their relationship with their children and also hinders relationships with other people. I for all his self possessed. Gravitas is still battling with his temper at moments with buddy lee. He's kind of mired himself. This sort of self imposed existential exile from the rest of humanity and so when their sons is sort of snaps amount of this spiritual me ease that they put themselves into the giving to their darker impulses but for a greater good.

Gloucester Lee Jenkins Sean Virginia USA Randolph Buddy Lee Gravitas
Dermaplaning vs. At-Home Facial Razors: What’s the Difference?

You Beauty

01:08 min | 2 weeks ago

Dermaplaning vs. At-Home Facial Razors: What’s the Difference?

"We're going to spotlight dermot planning which is basically a very fancy way of saying you shave your face. Professionals differ the to by saying that face. Shaving is something that could be done at home. With a razor to remove like the surface lay page fuzz that we all have while gemma planning involves a dermatologist of fancy. Skin person to actually scrape. You'll face with a surgical scalpel to remove the head of the peach fuzz and even the very top layer of your skin which sounds very aggressive. Doesn't it said think of shaving as the diy hair removal option and the demo planning is the professional version so while this is a relatively new practice to hit us. Weston is the western civilization asian. Women have been using this amazing japanese facial technique. It's called calgary in japanese for centuries clever asses. Now there's absolutely no rule that says that you have to shave your face or you don't have to shave anything. Do whatever you want to do. But if you're looking for ways to make shaky foundation look smoother or to improve your skin. Texture it's a damn good

Dermot Gemma Weston Calgary
Exploiting Loose-Aggressive Poker Players

Smart Poker Study Podcast

04:12 min | Last month

Exploiting Loose-Aggressive Poker Players

"Aggressive players play exactly as the name implies. They throw chips in with a ton of different hands. So they're loose. Obviously and normally they put in chips as bets and raises rather than checks and calls of course. So they're aggressive for your average tight aggressive player. These lags presents a big problem as a tight aggressive yourself in. I assume many of you. Are you know that betson raises often. Equal a strong hand. Well lags try to use this idea against you. Their goal is to force you to fold with lots of pre flop open raises and post flop bets and raises. If you fold great. They took down simple pot. And now it's onto the next hand and if you call or re raise their hope is that you do this at the wrong time. You think they're bluffing. But they now have the nuts and can get maximum value due to their laggy image. So how do we take. Advantage of these ultra aggressive players. Who like to push us around. I'm going to answer this question through three different parts. Part one is about your position. In relation to the lag part two is about playing pre flop against lags and part three is about playing post flop against them so first off part one your position against a lags now lags love to use position to make things incredibly difficult on you. You know that position gives more information in the hand and as soon as you check on a street. You've given them information now. Sometimes your check is expected like maybe you called pre flop from the big blind. And obviously you're going to check it to the razor. Most of the time you do so this expected check isn't necessarily a sign of weakness but if you check the flop and they checked behind they now showed a little bit of weakness if you then check again on the turn you've shown even more weakness you've checked twice and you've checked one of those times after they've shown weakness so now you are the weakest one while from an image standpoint. You're the weakest right now in this hand now. They're going to use their aggression to take the pot from you now positional advantage. It's given to whoever sits on your left whether there are lag. A tag a knit or whale but the worst players to give this advantage to or the lags. They're the ones that are most likely going to three bit when you open raise pre flop. And they're the ones that are going to bet when you check or raise when you bet down the streets you're making poker harder on yourself with a lag on your left now. I have to tips in related to position to help you take advantage of lags tip. Number one is to play against them. In position with position comes more information and more formation leads to more positive e decisions. You want to choose your seats and your tables wisely. Leave the table or change seats. If you're allowed to do that when you have unfavourable position against a lag. I want you to think back to every table that you've had a hard time with most likely you had a competent and loose aggressive player to your left or maybe more than one you wanna make poker easier and increase your profit potential by having position on those lags and tip number two. Is that if you choose to play with a lag on your left you must expect aggression from them plan for it before you make your pre flop decisions and for each of your post flop decisions as well if you bet expect to call or raise if you check expect a bit then the question becomes what will i do. When the lag makes that expected aggressive play already part two is pre flop against the loose aggressive players aggression normally comes in one of two forms pre flop from loose aggressive player. They either open raise or they three bet or greater against you. Occasionally you'll find the loose aggressives who loved to limp raise. That's not as frequent as the other two. of course. also sometimes you'll come across lags. Who liked to do a lot of pre flop calling but they utilize post flop aggression but for the most part a lag is aggressive. Both pre flop and post flop. They see the value in open raising and three bedding eight ton pre flop and they see the value of c betting raising seabeds check raising dunk. Betting and probing post flop.

Betson
One Stat at a Time

Daily Poker Tips

01:04 min | Last month

One Stat at a Time

"One stat. at time. The hood is just a jumble of numbers at first to get beyond this. I recommend you focus on one step at a time. During your play. Sessions trying to simultaneously interpret and use pip three bet flop seabed. Check raise and dog bit when you're just starting out is overwhelming and frustrating. I recommend if you haven't done so already start by learning pre flop stats. These are foundational stats. That must be understood and utilized before post flop stats the reason is because all stanford contextual when you might look at a flop seabed of ninety ninety percent and whoa what a buffer but in order for anyone to have the opportunity to see the flop she had to be the pre flop razor if nitty. Nancy only raises six percent of the time with nines or better as better and king queen suited then d ninety percent. Flops is not to bluffing. She simply see betting with her. Strong prefab range which hits lots of over pairs top pair hands and strong as high hands

Nancy
Before You Call Preflop, Complete This Sentence

Daily Poker Tips

01:04 min | Last month

Before You Call Preflop, Complete This Sentence

"It comes to calling pre flop. I have a really important father's day tip for you before you call complete this sentence right here. I'm happy calling here with blank. Hand against blink player in this position so if you can complete that sentence and you know you're happy calling here then go ahead and call like for example you could say something like i'm happy here calling with king jack suited versus this flop on player. Who has a wide range. Even though i'm giving him position if the situation sounds good when you put it out into into a full sentence like that then go ahead make the call but if it sounds like a dangerous unprofitable ugly situation to be in. Do not make the call for example. Maybe you complete the sentence and you say something like i'm not happy calling with jackie suited versus this aggressive smart player from out of position in the small blind. If you say something like that. I mean that sounds like a terrible spot right given one of the best players to the table position against you in all you have is a jacket suited. And he was the open razor. Yeah if it sounds like a crap spot to put yourself in go ahead and fold

King Jack Jackie
Exploring Father Daughter Relationships

Therapy for Black Girls

01:57 min | Last month

Exploring Father Daughter Relationships

"Everyday language we will often hear this term thrown around daddy issues razor this idea that if you don't have a strong relationship with your dad then you're kinda doomed in all relationships with german and so i would love you to just start by telling us a little bit about how if at all the father daughter relationship influences daughters quality of relationships with other men. Yeah absolutely and so. I definitely think it's not accurate. You know to assume bid you're doomed right if you didn't have your father if you unhealthy relationship with the father but at the same time i definitely believe the fathers played a huge role in daughters and just their relationship with men. It's important i think for many women who don't have that healthy relationship to really just explore the impact that their father had on their lives. You know whether it's through just being absent or if they were inconsistent or they were there and created a toxic environment whether it's a man or woman specifically with women. I i definitely think there's an impact when there's an unhealthy relationship with the father. He you say more about that. How you kind of see that show. Yeah absolutely so. I think it shows up in one of the biggest ways that i see is just the standard that you grow accustomed to. Unfortunately you see a lot of times many successful women who oftentimes find themselves in this cycle relational when when you kinda dig a little bit deeper you see that. They had an unhealthy relationship with the father and again. That's not all women. But a lotta times. That's the case. And unfortunately i think it's many cases because of this unhealthy standard. So is much as you know that it's unhealthy as much as you know that. It's intuitive lead. This is not right in some ways. Unfortunately you grow accustomed to it until as you kind of venture off into the dating world in many ways it's almost like this gravitational pool. It takes you back to this unhealthy standard and so that one of the areas. That i see

Hands from $5/$10 Online 6-Max Cash

Chasing Poker Greatness

04:18 min | 2 months ago

Hands from $5/$10 Online 6-Max Cash

"We'll just jump right into it then a and that actually. This had got reviewed poker power on wednesday and there are a lot of Differing opinions. On what i should what people thought i should be doing So go flip it back to you and see what what you have to say. Hand starts with me opening the cutoff at five. Ted nolan that with pocket. Jacks the button only have two hands on him but appears to be fish. Flat the button and the big blinds. Who i'm guessing as a also don't have too many hands on him also calls we go to a nine four deuce two-tone flop the big blind checks off again. I pocket i check. I'm going to be checking range. Multi way Especially on a board. Like this. I think and then the fish on the button. That's forty dollars in to seventy to fifty the reagan the big blind raises to one hundred and ten dollars and i was pretty lost what to do facing the check. Raise with an repair multi. Yes so when we were looking at this hand before in the run through. I think that in game you were not clear as to whether or not the button was a fish because they do have mostly full stack. My intuition told me kinda straight away before you even described anything about the hand that the button was a fish because they had nine eighty in their stack. The blinds go through. That would be ninety nine hundred five. I got the feeling that they were fish. But then when they bet forty into seventy two on the flop. I think that kind of confirms that there a weaker player in the pool. Because i don't think that's sizing should like be thing. Whatever it is that they. I don't even know. What percentage that is that they chose to bet they're a little bit more than fifty percent so yeah like basically the button who is a fish. That's about sixty percent and the big line to looks to be a rag and intuitively. I would imagine they are oreg check raises less than three x here here than the actions back on us with our jackson. Nine four two hearts so my first inclination here is to bet three bet or not bad three bed. Check three bet. And that's for a few reasons number one. The buttons forty dollar bet because that designates them a fish. I have to imagine that the big blind wants to raise choose a larger sizing with their sets and their value. So that kind of small check raise from forty to one. Ten makes me believe that like they could be doing this fairly wide. They don't necessarily just have to have like sets or even like a street as five of heart type hands. They could be doing this with like top pair just as protection. They'd be doing this with just whatever they could check raised with like jackson diamonds. Trying to run a multi street bluff. I guess again objective diamonds. We got jack of diamonds. But you see my point right like basically some sort of back doors type type hand and the reason that i want to put more money in the pot now Kind of smallish around two thirty five ish to thirty by my go-to would be like to thirty four. But i can't tell you why secret proprietary information is to thirty four but because i think the check razor doesn't necessarily have sets here all the time like they've got an expanded wider range than that we can check raise against them just fine. I don't wanna flat because we flat that gives the button a great opportunity to call and realize equity getting just an amazing price. I think at that point if we flat. There's like three thirty in the pot. They've got the call seventy two win three thirty so they're getting like close to five to one and our hand does need some kind of

Ted Nolan Reagan Jackson
Hughes Retires as Storm Coach; Quinn Takes Over

News, Traffic and Weather

00:19 sec | 2 months ago

Hughes Retires as Storm Coach; Quinn Takes Over

"A career Dan Hughes has announced he is retiring and the storm assistant Noelle Quinn will now be the head coach. The 66 year old says the rigors of coaching in the WN BA have taken a toll. He says he will continue to serve as an assistant coach for the U. S women's basketball team at the Tokyo Olympics, though A razor clam dick today as many

Dan Hughes Noelle Quinn U. Basketball Tokyo Olympics
How the Art of Manliness Monetizes Its Loyal Audience

The Business of Content

02:04 min | 2 months ago

How the Art of Manliness Monetizes Its Loyal Audience

"So. You're kind of jack of all trades at the art of manliness. How was that company founded. So the origin story starts Way back in two thousand eight which seems like sort of ancient times in the internet world. Right bed my founder and editor in chief was at a bookstore. I believe it was a borders and browsing the men's magazines. Section was kind of disappointed with the content. He was seeing. So you know. It was stuff about the latest six-figure car How to get six pack ads and you know look better in bed on the weekend kind of thing you know. I really want something different out of a men's lifestyle content basically and so. He started up the art of manliness. The very first article was how to shave. Like your grandpa which was about a straight razor. Shaving it's still a popular articles. So that's kinda the gist of it and Been going strong ever since so what. Thirteen years later. Still go with strong with text. Podcasts and i joined the team fulltime a little over eight years ago and it's kind of it's mostly like a at least on the on the website version. It's like essays. It's not like doing like original reporting or anything like that it's our Kind of approach the content creation on the website. Sure yeah ads. It's a lot of how to's so across categories Stuff about style. There's you know like home maintenance. How to's there's stuff about a books hobbies stuff to do in your free time And then we do a little bit of like loss iffy ads kind of what we call our a man's life section which is kinda headier more original stuff but you're right in that it's not like getting always sort of aggregating information from books and other expert interviews and articles things like that.

One Pot-Earning Play I Love

Smart Poker Study Podcast

02:19 min | 3 months ago

One Pot-Earning Play I Love

"The first pot earning play is floating flops to steal turns in this. Play the general way it works. Is you call the flop seabed with the plan of bluffing when they check on the turn. So it's a very simple call now bluff later plan and i absolutely love this play and i wanna share with you how to do it properly. There's five aspects that really help. If all of these things are in place really help this place succeed number. One is to be in position. Everything in poker's easier when you're in position you all know this right and being in position makes it more likely your opponents going to fail to seabed from out of position on the next street when they show you that weakness it's your time to pounce aspect number two is to have some equity. Now you can do this Call the flop. Beloved the turn with absolutely no equity. No draw no good pair. Nothing potential right. It's like holding eight. Seven on an ace king deuce flop but i really liked to do this with some sort of pair or even a backdoor draw or over cards on the flop that kind of equity just in case they call back into something. Good for example. You're holding the king. Spate queen of spades and the flop is nine three deuce with one spade so there are some really good. Turn cards for you. A king a queen gives you top pair. A jack or ten gives you a gut shot draw and any spade gives you a flush draw now if he checks to you on any of those cards and then you decide to bet and he calls. You can hit a good card on the river completing astray completing a flush giving you a top pair hand even a two pair trip kings. Now the third aspect is that the razors range missed both the flop and the turn so your opponent they raised pre flop and you called in position. They have plenty of. Ace king ex-queen x. hands in their range. So what kind of boards are they going to hate seeing probably low in dry boards. Things like nine do's and four or five seven also like monotone boards and even to tone boards couple of spades out there. That's going to be pretty scary if they don't hold a spade

Chauvin convicted on all counts in Floyd death

AP News Radio

00:55 sec | 3 months ago

Chauvin convicted on all counts in Floyd death

"A Minneapolis jury has convicted former police officer Derek Chauvin on all charges in George Floyd's death Floyd died eleven months ago after Chauvin peen Disney on or close to his neck for about nine and a half minutes the now fired officer has been convicted on charges of second degree murder third degree murder and second degree manslaughter the panel of six white and six black or multiracial jurors deliberated about ten hours delivering the verdict at a courthouse surrounded by razor wire in a city full of National Guard troops Minneapolis in cities nationwide had been bracing for unrest following the case that set the country on edge forcing it to re examine racism and policing president Biden had said earlier the case was overwhelming and he hoped the jury would reach the right verdict solder AMAG ani Washington

Derek Chauvin George Floyd Chauvin Peen Disney Minneapolis Floyd National Guard Biden Ani Washington
Interview With Super Hornet Pilot, JD Davis AKA Tip

Pilot to Pilot - Aviation Podcast

01:31 min | 3 months ago

Interview With Super Hornet Pilot, JD Davis AKA Tip

"Jd aka tip. What's going on man. Welcome to the pilot the pilot podcast glad to be here. Yeah we were laughing a little bit four but I'm gonna call you by your costs. I'm tip which I don't know the full story behind it but it's pretty cool to have a call sign have a nickname when i was growing up. I always wanted one. I never joined the military to get one but I'm very envious of all those call signs. But i'm guessing they all have a very unique story by them if they all the call signs and to go back probably will to maybe beyond that And sometimes they're really funny. Other times are active something stupid. He did Other ones have to do with your personality Did you know that it just runs. The whole gamut as i'll call signs come about what's the clearest sign you've ever heard. Oh man that is a tough one. The coolest call sign. I've ever heard outside of tip. Of course right well I i would have to say that. Like the navy versus air force. Call signs of a very different You know a lot of times in the air force you guys will have call signs like razor or like blade or you know blaster or something like that navy. Most the time the call sends the navy. Were just kind of making fun of our buddies. It'll come rodman building You know so in the navy. Coolest call sign i've Yeah i'd have to think about that for a little bit List of one. I know our acronyms or something that you know. They did stupid along the

Navy Rodman
Iran Names Suspect in Natanz Attack, Says He Fled Country

Glenn Beck

00:35 sec | 3 months ago

Iran Names Suspect in Natanz Attack, Says He Fled Country

"Iran says has identified a suspect in an attack earlier this month. I'm one of its nuclear facilities. The attack taking place April 11th at Iran's Natanz nuclear facility, damaging centrifuges used to enrich uranium state television. Naming the suspect is 43 year old razor Karimi and showing a purported passport style photo of him. Iran, saying Karimi fled the country hours before the sabotage. Opened state TV, also wearing what appeared to be an Interpol red notice seeking Corini's arrest, But there's been no comment from Interpol initial reports in Israeli media blaming a cyber attack for the

Iran Razor Karimi Karimi Corini
Demonstrations Continue for Seventh Straight Night in Brooklyn Center

NPR News Now

01:02 min | 3 months ago

Demonstrations Continue for Seventh Straight Night in Brooklyn Center

"Continue this weekend in the minneapolis. Suburb of brooklyn center. Where a white police officer shot and killed a twenty year old black man. Last sunday about one hundred demonstrators were detained. After protests outside. The police department turned violent last night. Npr's david schaper reports. Tensions remain high as the trial of former police officer. Derek chauvin wraps up. Since last sunday after one of its officers shot and killed twenty year old dante right during a traffic. Stop the brooklyn center. Police department building has become a fortress surrounded by two rows of heavy concrete barriers high fencing and razor wire with national guard soldiers standing watch kim griffin of a community group called a mother's love says such a militarized presence only deepens the divide between the police in the community to me is to engage the community and and more habit to me. It's just inviting more violence. More destructive behavior protests are expected to continue here almost around the clock

Brooklyn Center White Police David Schaper Derek Chauvin Police Department Minneapolis NPR Kim Griffin Dante
Part One of Your Poker Development Plan

Smart Poker Study Podcast

01:58 min | 3 months ago

Part One of Your Poker Development Plan

"Want poker to be profitable but at the same time. You wanna enjoy your poker journey. Doing these four things makes poker easier and more enjoyable for you which is most likely going to lead to more studying more play more fun more prophets. So here's my four part poker development plan part. One is to live for bread and butter so brennan butter. It's seeing the flop in position as the pre flop razor versus one or two other players. It's a concept that i initially learned from tommy angelo in his book elements of poker my own poker game and what i teach. My students is all about bread and butter. Now when you live for bread and butter it ingrains the most important aspects for profitable poking your skillset namely those two aspects that you need for profitable poker our understanding and and utilizing the value of position and the value of having the pre flop range. So when you live for bread and butter you strive for positional advantage with every single hand that you play and if you can't have post flop position you're giving that advantage to someone else and it makes poker less profitable obviously less fun. You hate playing out of position right and you love being in position yeah live for brennan butter. Strive for that positional advantage. Also when you live for bread and butter you strive to be the last razor pre flop that means you have the best hands in your pocket. Queens puckett kings aces right and your opponent who called you pre flop. They don't have those in their range. They've got a weaker range. Which gives you that. Mathematical pre flop advantage. Now you might be holding jack nine suited. But they don't know that right. You came in for the race of. They called for all day. No you have ace. King ace's queens tens in your age all that good stuff right now when you have bread and butter you have that range advantage with that mathematical advantage and the positional advantage against him. It is so hard for them to overcome that in the long

Tommy Angelo Queens Puckett Kings Brennan King Ace Jack
The New Adjustable Tatara Razor is Getting Rave Reviews

Worst Shaving Podcast Ever

01:03 min | 4 months ago

The New Adjustable Tatara Razor is Getting Rave Reviews

"Tara has recently on released a teaser about their upcoming. I think they initially sold out of the first wave but they. I'm on their mailing list. So there's subscriber list so i should be getting notified when the next one comes in no telling when that will be. Hopefully it'll be soon. But they released a adjustable razor. And i've heard nothing but good things about tortora about the raises. They've released like the nugget. Achie- i think i'm hope i'm pronouncing that correctly And the matsunami is what it's called but they released a number of razors that you know kind of appeal to different people and i've seen the packaging. I've never purchased a razor from the myself. It's always been kind of one of those things where i've gone. Ironically back and forth between getting one of their razors or getting a blackbird. Probably eventually get both. But that's been kind of one of my next big purchasing decisions is kind of between those

Tortora Tara
Vehicle attack raises new questions about US Capitol security

NBC Nightly News

01:47 min | 4 months ago

Vehicle attack raises new questions about US Capitol security

"Death of officer ovens is another blow to the capitol hill. Police force still really after the january attack. Tonight there are new questions about how to keep the capitol building safe while maintaining in is a symbol of democracy von hilliard. Has that part of the story. The threat of domestic attacks here in washington clear january six and indirection of the us capital then again friday the killing of a capital police officer. We have to get to the root cause of this violence in the months after the january attack washington fortified it's capitol grounds. It looks terrible to have the big of our democracy surrounded by razor wire and national guard troops the temporary outer barbed wire barrier came down leaving. Just this fencing capitol police officers in this existing barrier to respond to friday's attack capital. Police have to be ready to twenty seven and they need the resources to do. Lieutenant general russel honore released review last month with proposals for permanent security reforms including the hiring of more than eight one hundred and fifty additional personnel and integrated retractable fencing system and quick response crises units. Whose powell about democracy congressman. Tim ryan chairs the house subcommittee overseeing the capitol police as lawmakers work on a two billion dollar bill that would provide the cash necessary to implement the security upgrades. We can't get too far ahead of ourselves. Without knowing that we have the ability to protect the capital capital hill residents have bared witnessed. What is now a neighborhood. This is our home so to such violence in our backyards. Just devastating

Von Hilliard Capitol Hill Washington Lieutenant General Russel Hono Tim Ryan House Subcommittee Capitol Police United States Powell
"razor" Discussed on The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

01:45 min | 4 months ago

"razor" Discussed on The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

"The <Speech_Music_Male> <Speech_Male> <SpeakerChange> <Music> <Silence> <Speech_Telephony_Male> <Advertisement> car. <Speech_Music_Male> We had a van because <Speech_Music_Male> we had a great <Speech_Music_Male> just incredible with <Speech_Music_Male> two so we used to get a big <Speech_Music_Male> fan. We call it the <Speech_Music_Male> hose. Mac <Speech_Music_Male> so <Speech_Music_Male> i think <Speech_Music_Male> We usually make triple <Speech_Male> h dry. Because <Speech_Male> you know he didn't drink <Speech_Music_Male> right so he's driving. <Speech_Male> I think <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> Shawn michaels might be <Speech_Male> sitting shotgun. Kevin <Speech_Male> i in the back <Speech_Male> got. Pj stuff <Speech_Music_Male> in the back <Speech_Music_Male> young way. It's like <Speech_Male> a beer cooler. <Speech_Male> And <Speech_Music_Male> of course there's comes <Speech_Music_Male> at time we've gotta sit <Speech_Music_Male> around and put ourselves over <Speech_Music_Male> talking about how great we <Speech_Music_Male> are committed that for <Speech_Music_Male> most of the ride <Speech_Music_Male> <Speech_Music_Male> but then <Speech_Male> yeah for me is thinking <Speech_Male> like <Speech_Male> drive around that <Speech_Male> city and when you leave <Speech_Male> the guard <Speech_Male> an era we left <Speech_Male> in an ambulance. <Speech_Male> You're on late. <Speech_Music_Male> Everybody filed <Speech_Music_Male> in an ambulance. I don't <Speech_Male> know if they did it when you were there. <Speech_Music_Male> But we'd all pilots <Speech_Music_Male> <SpeakerChange> with throw <Speech_Music_Male> us away from the building. <Speech_Male> You haven't been <Speech_Male> an aimless. Get out of the <Speech_Male> building because if you pull <Speech_Male> through newtown towncar <Speech_Male> they would rip your mirrors <Speech_Male> off and this <Speech_Male> was if they love you as <Speech_Male> a baby face or <Speech_Male> they hated you as a heel <Speech_Male> they would <Speech_Male> rip your You haven't been <Speech_Male> an aimless. Get out of the <Speech_Male> building because if you pull <Speech_Male> through newtown towncar <Speech_Male> they would rip your mirrors <Speech_Male> off and this <Speech_Male> was if they love you as <Speech_Male> a baby face or <Speech_Male> they hated you as a heel <Speech_Male> they would <Speech_Male> rip your windshield <Speech_Male> wipers off your rear <Speech_Male> view mirrors. And <Speech_Male> you're proud of it. <Speech_Male> If you over but you <Speech_Male> still had to pay for the <Speech_Male> damage to the rent a cop <Speech_Male> <Speech_Male> snuck out an <Speech_Male> airless. <SpeakerChange> It was <Speech_Male> great. Are <Speech_Music_Male> you were at the cargo <Speech_Male> and get the extra <Speech_Male> you got <Speech_Music_Male> <Speech_Male> and i felt bittersweet <Speech_Male> steve. I had no <Music> idea that you <Speech_Music_Male> know any of that. Individual <Speech_Male> stuff is going to work <Speech_Male> you know. I <Speech_Male> had never even <Speech_Music_Male> talked to hear this <Speech_Music_Male> on the phones. All <Silence> lawyers and agents <Speech_Male> so. <Speech_Male> I had no idea <Speech_Music_Male> what was going to happen. I <Speech_Male> really felt uncertain. <Speech_Male> About what would <Speech_Male> you have be creatively <Speech_Male> renouncing. Was i <Speech_Music_Male> going to be satisfied that way. <Speech_Music_Male> But i knew <Speech_Telephony_Male> at least i was going <Speech_Music_Male> to be able to provide for <Speech_Male> being biased. <Speech_Male> So <Speech_Male> it wasn't a very good <Speech_Male> feeling. That's what i dealt <Speech_Music_Male>

Shawn michaels Kevin two triple
"razor" Discussed on The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

02:24 min | 4 months ago

"razor" Discussed on The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

"Com. Today we're welcoming back. I p vanished to this show. So what is i p vanish. Ip vanish is a virtual private network of vpn for short and a vpn is super important tool that helps you safely browse the internet. You can use a vpn on your computers tablets phones. even things like your fire stick when you're streaming media when you use a vpn data is encrypted what you're reading what you're searching what you're watching. Whatever it is you're doing that's important because what you're doing on the internet isn't my business and it's no one else's business either. Ip vanished helps you remain anonymous insecure on the internet. I p vanishes just three dollars and forty nine cents a month for just three dollars and forty nine cents a month or twenty seven ninety nine a year. You can help protect your online privacy and security. Now here's everything you need to know anonymous ip addresses. This means your personal ip address can't be tracked by anyone on the web. You can circumvent any online censorship. Ip vanish has more than fifteen hundred servers in seventy plus locations. Get protection when using public wi fi remember with ip vanish. All your data is encrypted. So no one can snoop on what you're doing. Twenty four seven support. Email 'em chat with them even call them there to help. If you remember. These guys supported the show a few weeks ago. They've come back with an even better deal wanting to offer something special for the new year. You're getting sixty five percent off now so go to ip vanish dot com slash austin to clean your sixty five percent savings. They have plan starting at three dollars and forty nine cents a month or twenty seven dollars and ninety nine cents a year. This is the time to sign up with our discount and their current promotion. You can get a vpn for sixty five percent off their usual offering. I vanish is the best of the best. Even rated four point seven out of five on trust pilot and that's with more than six thousand reviews. show these guys some love. they repeat sponsors. Remember it's ip vanished dot com slash austin to get the deal and start protecting yourself online. Welcome to the steve austin show own..

Biden leaves door open for Senate changes to advance agenda

AP News Radio

00:54 sec | 4 months ago

Biden leaves door open for Senate changes to advance agenda

"President Biden is promising big changes and suggesting he is open to changing Senate procedures to make them happen after opening yesterday's media news conference with the new goal for covert nineteen vaccinations two hundred million in his first one Hundred Days the president was asked no questions about the pandemic instead he faced to swoop on immigration gun control voting rights I'm gonna do with all those problems but he has a razor thin majority in the Senate and is leaving the door open to reforming rules that would allow bills to pass with fewer votes if we have to if there's complete lockdown in chaos as he grapples with immediate issues the seventy eight year old president also said for the first time he plans to run for re election but again the left open the possibility of leaving after a single term Sager mag ani Washington

President Biden Senate Ani Washington
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

01:41 min | 5 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"You is autumn's razor a an item that you can pick up like a plus one comes. Razor can be employed in combat. It's like the master sword. Yeah surely there is not combat in this game. I should hope not. I hope it's just a lot of talking. A catholic cells cast the poverty of christ on you. Well in the screenshot. I was looking. It does look like the main character. Slash autumn does have a pair of spectacles. But then there's like one. two three. There are multiple empty spots here. So i guess he gets other stuff. I mean i guess. Various books and whatnot Some element juice probably some cheese some cheese or the gets some fried cheese at some point. Yeah i think so but mostly books mostly books all right so there you have. It all comes razor. Hopefully we're able to to lay it out for you. You know an explanation of what the what comes. Razor is where it came from some of the various opinions on its usefulness so you can take the tool. Put it back into the tool chest to know a little bit more about it. The next time you pull it out and go to use it in the meantime if you want to check out other episodes of stuff to blow your mind go to stuff to blow your mind dot com. That'll shoot you over to the iheart listing for this podcast but ultimately you can find podcast wherever you get your podcast. We don't care where that is wherever it happens to be. Make sure these subscribe that you rate the review. These are the things that help us out huge. Thanks as always to our excellent audio producer. Seth nicholas johnson. If you'd like to get in touch with us with feedback on this episode or any other suggested topic for the future or just.

Seth nicholas johnson christ Slash autumn two one three Razor pair of spectacles com
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

04:12 min | 5 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"Cause of something and no evidence that be is the cause of something than a alone is statistically a better explanation than a and b together this goes back to the stacking of explanations that we were talking about earlier. Like if you've got an explanation that already explains everything. There is no justification for adding additional explanations on top of it. You don't need to add the angels pushing the planet's right. Well let's come back to the murder scenario. We apply this forensically. Well so we're actually. I think says something kind of like this but like if you have clear evidence of one cause of death on somebody you don't need to assume extra causes of death stacking on top of it without direct evidence of them as well so if you find like you know a body I dunno body the bottom of a cliff and they're dead. You can assume that it was falling off the cliff that killed them. You don't need to also assume that they were poisoned or something. Unless you know you do blood talks than it comes back with poison. You can assume it then. But there's no reason to start stacking on additional assumptions right. Okay now there's another way that sober says sometimes oxfam's razor actually does hold true. It sometimes simpler. Explanations are better and it's simply that sometimes simpler theories are better supported by observations He gives this great example. Suppose all the lights on your street go out. You could have two competing. Hypotheses i won something happened at the power plant and that influenced what happened to all the lights in the neighborhood. Or maybe there's a downed power line. Something like that. The other one something happened to all of the light bulbs at the same time. Now these would both explain the observations right Like either either. All of the light bulb suddenly went out on their own independently. Coincidentally all at the same time or there's something happened with the power supply to the whole neighborhood Sober argues based on the work of the philosopher. Hans reichenbach that in this case you can't actually show mathematically that the evidence for the first for the power plant hypothesis is stronger. Just based on the fact that it's simpler and a a similar example in real science. Look at common descent in biology so based on the evidence of massive amounts of genetic code shared by all living things. People usually say okay. That-that's evidence of common descent. We all share a common ancestor. We all inherit some common genetic code now you could also say well maybe all living things on earth have different ancestors and they just happened by coincidence to have overlapping strings of genetic code. That would require a lot of strange coincidences. So the evidence actually favors common descent. Just like it favors a power outage over hundreds of simultaneous lightbulb failures. So a serial killer examples this might be. Oh man what's happening at dark corners of your brain today. Rob keep coming back to it. I guess but okay. Okay so one per so if like people they're always dead people and they all have say a death's head moth caterpillar Oh yes yes yes. Yes or was it. A cocoon can't recall off hand from silence to the land. They've got like a moth cocoon in their mouth or something. So perhaps they just happened to each individually wind up with one in their mouth like somebody accidentally eight one on the salad bar and other one was like looking up fell out of a tree because one it escaped from a private collection was living in the tree. you can have independent Explanations for why each of these occurred or the other possibility is somebody's killing them and putting them in their throats right. The one common explanation actually explains observations better than assuming a whole bunch of strange coincidence seattle and then we got the third paradigm sober gets into which is he says. Sometimes the simplicity of a model is relevant to estimating its predictive accuracy. So what a good theories do while they accurate predictions about things..

Hans reichenbach earth Rob first today each both third paradigm one cause Sober oxfam one common explanation two hundreds of simultaneous light eight one
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

03:56 min | 5 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"That doesn't sound like a very scientific criterion. No i mean maybe his kind of breaking it down for people. You know what i mean. Of course he did turn out to be right but like that the that seems like an unjustified assumption based on what he knew at the time ball also points out that by the time kepler comes around. We're no longer in a situation of competing theories trying to explain the same observations because kepler had access to better observations quote the point. Here is that as a tool for distinguishing between rival theories. Autumn's razor is only relevant if the two theories predict identical results but one is simpler than the other which is to say. It makes fewer assumptions. This is situation rarely if ever encountered in science much more. Often theories are distinguished by making fewer assumptions but different ones. It's then not obvious how to weigh them up. I think this is a fantastic point. Right i mean did come back to the aquatic ape theory like that that is a of these rare situations. I think that seems to match up making additional assumptions. And it's like oh yeah we would have to keep those traits later anyway. We'd need explanations for that. It just seems like it's making more assumptions. But that's almost never how it goes. Usually the assumption is just different assumptions. And then how do you know which assumption simpler than the other one right. The the whole aquatic eight section of the of presumed evolutionary advancement is kind of its own at the cycle. Yeah exactly removed. Because there's an cycle in this theory but not in this exactly. Yes i mean if you're trying to look at like not additional assumptions in a theory but just different assumptions in theory even cases where to it might seem obvious one way or another which seems simpler. It's not always obvious to people at the time He he brings up the question of darwinian. Evolution is descend from a common ancestor more or less complicated than the idea of a divine created. Order common descent. I i think that would seem like a less complicated theory too many of us today but would it have seemed simpler to the world view of people who were debating common descent in the mid late nineteenth century. Who you know you've already got theistic. Worldview built in some then right right. Yeah yeah a lot at this does come down again coming to where we spoke about earlier regarding the basic religious argument coming from a a really religious background. We've had this This the idea. The reality of god hammered into you. And then you're presented with With with the argument you know you may say we'll know that that business that requires farm. They're at so many episodes calls in your your your atheism where my my faith is. Just a clear and straightforward is a whistle. I mean people did actually argue that way. They'd say look at all this weird stuff. You have to assume about the history of life and all i believe is a divine created order. Yeah i mean you. It's like mapra sticker thing like What god god wrote it. I believe it a story three steps you. Yeah it is. Simplicity is often in the eye of the beholder. Like you don't have. I mean there are some people who would argue their cases where you can try to mathematically quantify complications or assumptions or simplicity. But in general. It's really hard to do. You don't have an objective measure that you can apply from the outside a lot of times. It's just going to be kind of fuzzy qualitative judgments what what seems like less of an assumption. You lack an objective. Measure people go with their intuitions. And this does not seem like a good recipe for sorting between theories so coming back again to two balls Formulation of razor is basically like if you have two theories that are competing to explain the same things that make all the same predictions and explain them equally..

mid late nineteenth century two theories today kepler two balls three steps one eight
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

04:50 min | 5 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"Yeah i stole dear inbred as simple explanation is probably probably just bought beer and bread or beer and bread was was placed in my car by a mysterious stranger things that are possible and could conceivably be the reason that i have beer and bread in the car. But autumn's razor slices away the unnecessary steps the less likely steps for the the shorter trip between point a. and point b. right and i think in cases like that you could say that comes razor. Doesn't necessarily prove a theory wrong but it is kind of a useful heuristic. It might help you use your intellectual time wisely right And that gets us to the next step. Which is the more comprehensive criticism. The idea that autumn is maybe in fact wrong or not useful. I think in some cases this criticism is true. So maybe we should get into it a bit. The first article. I wanted to look at is called the tyranny of simple explanations and it was published in the atlantic. It was written by science writer. Philip ball one of my favorite current science writer who wrote the book beyond weird really fantastic book on physics that i recommended last summer. Yeah this is one of your reading picks. I think yeah i. It's really good. It's one of those books that you may think you already. You've already read a quantum physics book. You know you know the basics you know you know the the what the interpretations are and all that i feel like this is one you can still be newly amazed by and learn a lot more from right and true to form a great science writer ball. I think makes a fantastic case in this article against all comes razor against a you know a liberal use of it So he starts by saying quote. Razor is often stated as an injunction not to make more assumptions than you absolutely need and that way it. It's almost a truism right. I mean like when you when you phrase it that way who would say well. Yeah no. I wanna make more assumptions than i mean. Yeah i mean you can come back to a forensic example right and detective work which i even carl sagan mix discusses this a lot like comparing science to to the work of a detective. Like how many hypotheses do you need for murder. And you know there's gonna you're gonna be the obvious ones that You know especially the razor going to be the primary candidates that.

Philip ball last summer one carl sagan mix first article razor Razor one of those books ball point a. point b. atlantic
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

04:45 min | 5 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"That i wanna refer to later by philosopher named elliott sober. He writes quote albert. Einstein spoke for many when he said quote it can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience. Which in ways again articulating. Something like comes razor it saying like you want the simplest possible explanation. That explains everything. And if we're sticking with einstein for a minute to go beyond positing something like angels if you want to go into real scientific hypotheses in history. There are all kinds of things that you might argue. Were sort of done away. With by autumn's razor ish kind of process. I think there are some historians and philosophers of science than my disagree there but one example that comes to my mind is the luminaries ether. You know it was once believed by many scientists that there had to be a medium in space through which light propagates right the same way that if you want sound propagate. There's no sound in space right. You've got to have sound traveling through a medium like air like water or like a. You know a like a steel wire. there must be mattered. Transmit that energy and so the idea was that space was filled with this stuff. This ether that light waves propagated through and eventually einstein into other thinkers and experiments. It started to be clear that the ether was superfluous. You didn't need it to explain any of the properties of light now. There's another example from history. That often comes up when people talk about comes razor. It's often brought up as a great example of all comes razor being applied But we're going to get to an article later on that. I think has presents a pretty devastating case against this being true but just to set it up here it is the idea of comparing the ptolemaic universe versus the copernican universe. Which obviously this argument was brought to a very dramatic and In the life of galileo galileo got into big trouble with the inquisition for among other things that are also politics but for among other things advocating the perkin model over the ptolemaic model For simplicity sake the copernican model of the solar system. Was of course the one we know to be more basically correct not totally correct but more correct because it was heliocentric appointed him sun at the center of the solar system and argued that the other planets including earth all rotated around the sun This of course was not the orthodox astronomy of the day. The more favoured models were the traditional toll.

Einstein elliott sober einstein albert one example earth galileo single datum ptolemaic universe sun copernican perkin
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

02:55 min | 5 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"The the main character in echoes novel is william of baskerville who is in many ways similar. He's a franciscan friar he's got a kind of empirical streak. Yeah he's basically a mashup of william of an sherlock holmes thus the baskerville looting to hound of the baskervilles the title itself the name of the rose has has been interpreted as being a reference to comes Nominalism there is no one rose. There is only the name of the rose but there are also other. I think interpretations on and it's meant to be kind of cryptic now. According to i was reading more about this. And it's been a been a little while since i've read in the name of the rose you maurice. Yes because we were missed remembering we were thinking now was it was the was it the case in the book that william was supposed to be this fictional main characters mentor in my mind is well no. Instead it was another medieval scholastic thinkers roger bacon. Yes so so yes. Roger bacon was william of baskervilles mentor as opposed to william of autumn. Who i do not believe is the arkam. Actually mentioned in the novel now So i i was reading a little bit more about. This is a thousand eighteen article that came out in philosophy now. Karen nicholson titled rose. And she pointed out that echo had apparently explored the possibility of simply using autumn as his main character in this novel but he ultimately quote did not find him very attractive person and therefore meaning. That makes sense right. If you're so you can either lean on a historical figure or it can do something a little more. Fun and do a mash up of arkham and the great detective. And ultimately i mean. That's one of the fun things about the novel is is that you do have these elements where it's it's sherlock holmes going up against board as you know that sort of thing. She writes this interesting as well. Just draw the parallel between william of baskerville and william of autumn. She writes quote in thirteen. Twenty seven the year in which the name of the rose is set arkham faced fifty-six charges of heresy and was excommunicated after escaping the protection of emperor. Louis of bavaria. This put an end to his academic career. Spent the rest of his life. As a political activist advocating freedom of speech the separation of church and state and arguing against the infallibility of the pope. She also points out that autumn. Like the fictional william of baskerville likely died of the plague All right on that note. We're gonna take a quick break when we come back. We will continue our discussion of oxfam's razor. This episode is brought to you by ibm from labrador to crow nuts the world loves a hybrid and so do businesses so today. They're going hybrid with ibm hybrid cloud approach. Let's them use watson a i is without rebuilding and bring all their partners and customers together in one place..

Karen nicholson oxfam william thirteen roger bacon maurice Roger bacon fifty-six charges Twenty seven today ibm one place franciscan baskerville Louis arkham eighteen article holmes bavaria sherlock holmes
"razor" Discussed on Fallacious Trump

Fallacious Trump

04:31 min | 6 months ago

"razor" Discussed on Fallacious Trump

"Nobody has more respect women than i. Nobody hillary clinton wants to abolish it lately. She wants to abolish our second amendment back pick. They didn't deny it. I don't think anybody denied it. Other presidents did not call write letters at some presidents. do anything many people have come out and said i'm right. You really do have to ask you. Where does it stop. Hello and welcome to felicia trump. The podcast were used insane. Ramblings of an orange number of lawyer kryptonite to explain nautical fallacies on your host. Jim and now your host mark a logical fallacy isn't error in reasoning the results bad or invalid arguments and the logical fallacy. We're looking at this week. Is failing or comes razor. Also known as far fetched hypothesis. I say we. But i'm going to have to leave you. In the capable hands of jim flying solo with the help from one or two others have. I got news for you kinda way for the next several episodes the work. I'm currently doing me. There be a conflict of policies doing this especially at the moment. But i'll be back to join in the fun again when this period has meanwhile then i'll hand you back over to jim to explain. Failing all comes riser. So he's talked about orcas razor on the show before and we've talked about a lot on alternative companionship for patrons queuing on book club. But basically it's the idea that way you have to Possibilities to explanations for something that do a good job of explaining it. I'm one of them. Requires you to make a certain number of assumptions and the other doesn't then the simplest explanation the the one that requires the least assumptions is more likely to be the right one now. It's absolutely a hard and fast rule sometimes the The real answer to something. The reelected nation is a bit more complicated is not always the simplest answer bunk. It's about the smallest number of new assumptions that you need to make so often that means that it is the simplest answer. It means that it's the most obvious answer in some cases and what people are doing when they are committing the fallacy of failing or comes razor is they are coming up with a far fetched hypothesis. A ridiculous or unlikely on suffer something and ignoring the obvious one that they all just refusing to accept the simple easy answer. That doesn't require lots of other things to be going on that you don't have any evidence for any full..

felicia trump Jim hillary clinton two one second amendment this week jim kryptonite razor
"razor" Discussed on The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

01:51 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on The Steve Austin Show - Unleashed!

"Ninety I'm meeting Crowbar I will hurt. They took bumps for me it didn't they bumped each other and very say okay like Mike Slam. He goes out watch then he goes. Mike Watts and then he goes you slam my I'm GonNa Watch. Did Slam me Mike to Watch they. I did I pump I. Ever took in a restroom Steve late flat in that ring in Tampa sports him. Harry grabbing around the shoulders, Mike grabbed me around. The ankles lifted me up waste I and dropped me. Just like a fuel pump. And now that's my first experience ever interesting. I still remember too that. Speaks to a mean God Dang to Barry Windham and Mike Rotunda to go out of their way for no reason other than the fact that they wanted to help his young cat out. Remember when I got into WCW and barracks came up to me. Says Kid who you travel with and I didn't really have a ride. I was a new guy in town. And I was riding down the road with him and peewee and you know burying what always rent those cadillacs and so? You want to drive and I said was sure I'd never driven a Cadillac before in my life, I never said in one, so they're driving down the road, looking at all the controls, and of course berries riding shotgun, because he didn't really give two shits about driving reading hot rod magazine P was in the back. I almost run off the road because I'm looking at all the controls, not jerk it back ain't. No Berry was always so cool. Yeah, he wouldn't sell anything unless he's. So. He just looked up at his magazine and said You. Okay Kid! Dan. Aerobics I was a huge fan of Barry Windham his work. Therefore, civil years was just. Held. Yeah and and so effortless he would allow people realize I'm GONNA to throw this out to you. Watch the way Barry. Windham gets into wrestling I goes..

Mike Slam Barry Windham Mike Mike Rotunda Mike Watts Cadillac WCW Aerobics Steve Tampa Harry Berry Dan
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

07:02 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"Or theory before it has had time to be tested in the field and a model evaluation system called the key. Information Criterion says that you can predict how good a new model or theory will be by two measures. How well it fits older existing data. Obviously better fits are better. And then how simple it is. Simpler models are better Simplicity is evaluated by quote. The number of adjustable parameters and having fewer is better now Sober gives an analysis of why this is the case using an example of trying to estimate the height of plants in a cornfield based on previous random samplings of the fields. I'M NOT GONNA get down into all the details of this but if you want a deeper understanding of this one I'd recommend looking up the article. The short version is that in some situations. Depending on a number of assumptions about what types of models and data you're dealing with. Simplicity of model is actually a good predictor of how well future data will conform to that model. And it's just a fact about statistics. So the source array of averages not a fact about individual cases on the ground okay now. He concludes by saying that these three paradigm 's have something in common quote whether a given problem fits into any of them depends on empirical assumptions about the problem. Those assumptions might be true of some problems but false of others although parsimonious demonstrably relevant informing judgments about what the world is lake. There is in the end. No unconditional and PRESUPPOSITION LEWIS. Justification for outcomes razor. So that's tough right like all comes. Razor is not a tool you can apply to every situation to get closer to the truth. It's a tool that is useful sometimes for some types of judgment and the real difficulty is recognizing when you're in one of those situations in which it's useful or one of those situations where it's actually just a logical red herring So really a K kinda comes back to You know we. We were talking about Sagan at the beginning this and how he said this is one of the tools in your skeptics tool chest. Yeah and the thing about a tool chest is that you have more than one tool in there and the screwdriver cannot be used for everything right. You can try cheese for a lot of things And certainly very useful for screws. But there's going to be a time when you're going to have to pull out another tool to deal with the problem. And they're going to be plenty of cases you will encounter. Were trying to use skeptical tool of outcomes. Razor is trying to clean out your electrical socket with the screwdriver. Nine you're just gonNA steer you astray and I'm very sorry that in the end here we don't have like a clean rule to guide you like this is when you can use it. This is when you can't I? It comes down to sober. Has some useful things to say there about types of situations where it is helpful But yeah there there. There's a I'm sorry. There's not just like an easy rule of thumb for win the win. The razor will be helpful. Yeah I mean. Ultimately it is a tool that was not plucked out of the sky but it was plucked out of human reasoning and And then human problem solving By the way Coming back to the name of the rose I I WANNA point out that. There is apparently a highly regarded Spanish. Nineteen eighty seven eight bit computer game based on the name of the road. Yeah it's a it's titled the Abbey Of the crime which was actually In in they conceived it as an adaptation of the name of the Rose but they were unable to secure permission to do so and They in fact I read. They didn't even hear back from Echo. They tried to get in touch with them and they get all of and try to imagine the Umberto Eco Essay about this video game when he tries to play it. That would be good. But basically the Abbey of the crime. The title they went with was apparently like the working title for the name of the Rose at one point so they they released it under that name and instead of having the main character be William of Baskerville. The main character is William of Arkham and I thought that was pretty much the into it. You know you can look up footage of the game and all but then I just learned for the first time this may be more common knowledge for everyone else out there i. There is a remake of it like they did like a revamped version of it with improved but nicely pixelated graphics. A the Abbey of the crime extensive which you can get on steam. Apparently I don't really do steam so I don't really know how it works by. Yeah it's listed on there. Came on twenty sixteen and it looks really cool. Like the for instance. Now the the updated sprites total characters in the game. They look so much like the actors in the original film. Adaptation of the name of the rose. Like it's a little Sean Connery and Christian slater. Yeah I don't know if they got permission to use their likenesses How close doesn't have to be an eight bits? I don't know if that's a great question But but but my my other question is this. I would like to ask listeners out there. If you've played this up please let me know how it is. I'm very curious not that I think I will actually play it for myself but I just. I'm Jim genuinely genuinely interested in In what a video game. Adaptation of the name of the rose is like if you know the solution at the end of the book can you automatically beat the game immediately or. Are there different solutions? I don't know a different murder. Each time. That'd be crazy arrives at the abbey speaks to the Abbot immediately. Says I got something to lay on? You is autumn's razor a an item that you can pick up like a plus one razor that can then be employed in combat like the Master Sword. Yeah surely there is not combat in this game. I should hope not. I hope it's just a lot of talking. Kathleen Bell's I cast the poverty of Christ on you. The screen shot. I was looking at does look like the main character Baskerville Slash. Arkham does have a pair of spectacles but then there's like one two three there multiple empty spots here so I guess he gets other stuff. I mean I guess various books and whatnot Some of the juice probably some cheese. Some cheese like fried cheese at some point. Yeah I think so. Ben Mostly books mostly books all right so there you have. It all comes razor. Hopefully we're able to to lay it out for you. You know an explanation of what the what comes. Razor is where it came from some the various opinions on its usefulness and its so you can take the tool. Put it back into the tool chest to know a little bit more about it the next time you pull it out and go to use it in the meantime if you WANNA check out other episodes of stuff to blow your mind go to stuff to blow your mind dot com. That'll shoot you over to the IHEART listing for this podcast but ultimately you can find this podcast wherever you get your podcast. We don't care that is wherever it happens to be. Just make sure that you subscribe you. Rate the review these things that help us out huge. Thanks as always to our excellent audio producer. Seth Nicholas Johnson. If you'd like to get in touch with us with feedback on this episode or any other to suggest for the future just.

Razor Arkham Seth Nicholas Johnson Umberto Eco Essay IHEART Sagan Sean Connery producer murder Kathleen Bell Jim Ben Christian slater
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

11:23 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"Right. We're back. There's one more article about outcomes razor that I found really interesting very useful and it is called. Why is simpler better? This was published in Neon by Elliott. Sober who is a professor of philosophy at the University of Wisconsin Madison and he's published a lot on the philosophy of science specifically as it applies to biology and natural selection and he wrote a book on the subject of Oxfam's Razor So he starts off. I think this is kind of interesting talking about simplicity and complexity in art. Could you possibly have a norm? That one is always better than the other. I mean that seems Kinda strange right like we love simple art an we love complex art and it would be strange to find a person who just wants one or the other. Yeah I mean this makes me think of Of movie posters. I don't you probably remember. It seems like it was a few years back. The the big craze for a while was that food would designers would come up with a super simplistic movie poster for a classic film more a Fan favourite film and it was really fun for a while and and then it kind of overstayed its welcome you know and and and it just became kind of at least to me anyway kind of kind of retaining even look at your like no. I. Don't I don't WanNa see this film reduced to this. Ultra simplistic symbol. I know exactly what you're talking about and I think there was a counterreaction yet. Because then you start to see a lot of graphic design for redoing old movies with new posters in the kind of return of the Jedi stuff. Yeah where there's a bunch of stuff there's like a bunch of people on the poster and things happening yeah or that is just kind of like a geometric explosion of things you know so yeah you saw. The pendulum swing both ways. But but in general I feel like it's that way in art. I think we can all point to specific examples in our own life. Where here's something we liked? It is very very tight and neat and minimalist. Maybe it's even like musical argument. Yeah I I love like minimalist ambient recordings but I'm also the type of person who enjoys Cacophonous recordings in complex recordings and likewise with visual arts likewise with a film TV and other mediums. You like hugely layered like mix tracks and stuff. Yeah yeah but I also like You know I I love splatter I don't I don't know it gets complicated right because even something that is very minimalist can be of course very complicated and layered. But but yeah I think everybody is gonNA everybody's taste pendulum is going to swing both ways there. But that's the world of art that right I mean so that's one thing that's the world of of human creation and sometimes those creations are are made to mimic nature but they are not necessarily nature itself. Yes and I think you can apply something similar to science so some of what sober is gonNA write in this Article Mirrors. What we were just talking about with ball like he starts off by saying okay. It's clear that simpler theories have some qualities that are good. They'RE EASIER TO UNDERSTAND. They're easier to remember they're easier to test And of course in just in the aesthetic since they can be more beautiful but he says the real problem comes in. When you're trying to figure out how good is a theory for telling you what's true you know how well does it predict things that you will encounter in the world. Some past scientific thinkers have tried to come up with reasons why it's like simplicity Is actually better. It actually predicts predicts the world better and a lot of these. Justifications were theological nature Like for example in Newton and talking about why he prefers simpler. Theories wrote quote to choose those constructions which without straining reduce things to the greatest simplicity The reason of this is that truth is ever to be found in simplicity and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things it is the perfection of God's works that they are all done with the greatest simplicity he is the god of order and not of confusion and therefore as they would understand the frame of the world must endeavour to reduce their knowledge to all possible simplicity so it must be in seeking to understand these visions. So again I I mean I would say that's fine to believe that. The scientific reason for believing that simpler things are more likely to be true right. Yeah to fall back on the idea that we have a a lawful good. God has opposed to a chaotic. Good God right I mean it would only be a bad God that would allow more complex explanations to be correct and sober actually says there are some cases today That can help us. No-win model is objectively. More accurate like modern statistical methods. There are some ways that you can reduce theories to mathematical advantage at least roughly and that in these cases there are times where you can show. Simpler is actually better He argues there. Three Paradigm in which autumn's razor holds true and so the first one is that sometimes simpler theories actually have higher probabilities. He invokes the medical adage. Here don't chase zebras. This this comes from the idea of You know when you hear hoof beats think horses not zebras. I've also heard that as UNICORNS as another analogy. If you hear footsteps coming down the hall you have a couple of different hypotheses. It's a human walking down the hall or it's a Robocop walking down the hall which one is going to be correct more often. Well it's going to be a human. It could conceivably be somebody in a robocup costume but the chances of that are pretty slim. I mean unless you like our inner robocop factory or something right. It's going to be a human way more often and the same goes in diagnosing diseases. If you observe a set of symptoms and patient history that are equally likely to predict a common disease and a rare disease. Pick the common one. You're going to be correct much more often than if you always pick the rare one right You know this also brings me back to the serial killer Example you know like what what is more more likely that it's someone the individual new or it is a random killing by a serial murderer right unless there is a serial murderer active in the area which raises that that the chances for that to be true by considerable margin. It's going to remain a zebra unicorn but zebra exactly unless you have independent evidence pointing to that as a superior hypothesis and there's no reason to go to a rare phenomenon that would explain things equally. Well yeah I know. It seems like they're enough. Podcast about serial murders in might seem like there are more of them out there than there are well there you get into some cognitive bias. The availability heuristic kicks in but Of course another question is like how often does a thorough review actually put you in the situation where two things explain what you see equally well like truly equally well one's rare in common but but so sober says that you've got this concept. He calls the razor of silence and the basic explanation of this. Is that if you've got a evidence that a is the cause of something and no evidence that be is the cause of something than a alone is statistically a better explanation than A and B together. This goes back to the stacking of explanations that we were talking about earlier. Like if you've got an explanation that already explains everything. There is no justification for adding additional explanations on top of it. You don't need to add the angels pushing the planets right. Well let's COME BACK TO THE MURDER SCENARIO. We apply this forensically Well I I. So we're actually. I think says something kind of like this. If you have clear evidence of one cause of death on somebody you don't need to assume extra causes of death stacking on top of it without direct evidence of them as well so if you find like a you know a a body I don't know body at the bottom of a cliff and they're dead. You can assume that it was falling off the cliff that killed them. You don't need to also assume that they were poisoned. Undersell came unless you know you do blood talks and then it comes back with poison you can assume then but there's no reason to start stacking on additional assumptions right now. There's another way that sober says Sometimes Oxfam's razor actually does hold true. It sometimes simpler. Explanations are better and it's simply that sometimes simpler theories are better supported by observations He gives this great example. Suppose all the lights on your street go out. You have two competing. Hypotheses I won something happened at the power plant and that influenced what happened to all the lights in the neighborhood. Or maybe there's downed power line. Something like that the other one. Something happened to all of the light bulbs at the same time. Now these would both explain the observations right Like either either. All of the light bulbs suddenly went out on their own independently. Just coincidentally all at the same time or there's something happened with the power supply. The whole neighborhood Sober argues based on the work of the philosopher. Hans Reichenbach that in this case you can actually show mathematically that the evidence for the first for the power plant hypothesis is stronger. Just based on the fact that it's simpler And a similar example in real science look at common descent in biology so based on the evidence of massive amounts of genetic code shared by all living things today. People usually say okay. That's evidence of common descent. We all share common ancestor. We all inherit some common genetic code. Now you could also say we'll maybe a all living things on earth have different ancestors and they just happened by coincidence to have overlapping strings of genetic code. That would require a lot of strange coincidences. So the evidence actually favors common descent just like it favors a power outage over hundreds of simultaneous lightbulb failures so a serial killer examples this might be oh man what's happening dark corners of your brain today rob just keep coming back to I. Guess Okay Okay. So one per so if like people there are all these dead people and they all have say A. Death's head moth What was the Caterpillar? Oh Yes yes yes yes or was it a cocoon can recall of hand from sounds lambs. They've got like a moth cocoon in their mouth or something. So perhaps they just happen to each individually wind up with one in their mouth like somebody accidentally eight one on the salad bar and other one was like looking up and it fell out of a tree. One had escaped from a private collection was living in the tree. you can have independent Explanations for why each of these occurred or the other possibility is somebody's killing them and putting them in their throats right. The one common explanation actually explains observations better than assuming a whole bunch of strange coincidence. Yes and then we GOT THE THIRD PARADIGM SOBER GETS INTO. Which is he says. Sometimes the simplicity of a model is relevant to estimating its predictive accuracy. So what good theories do well. They make accurate predictions about things. We don't know yet. They either accurately predict. Future measurements or outcomes or discoveries does raise or have anything to say here. Sober says yes sometimes. Simplicity affects our best guesses. About how accurate a new theory will be and he cites the work of a Japanese statistician named a hero. Tegu ACA Iki who did important work in a field called model selection theory. This means how to judge.

Oxfam Sober professor of philosophy University of Wisconsin Madiso Hans Reichenbach ACA Iki Newton MURDER robocup Undersell A. Death
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

04:32 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"St at a time. How do you resolve that? It just does not match our experience of reality. So that's where the interpretations of quantum mechanics come in. They're trying to reconcile. This difference explaining why the in deterministic probabilistic quantum world somehow resolves into the solid deterministic world. That we experience every day and there are tons of interpretations you've got like. The Classic Copenhagen interpretation which predicts that objects exist in a kind of an estate of superposition until something interacts with them and collapses. The wave function makes them assume one state or the other. You've got the the now popular. Many worlds interpretation originating with the physicist Hugh Everett the third in the late Nineteen Fifties. The suggests that reality is constantly splitting into infinite alternate timelines based on the different possible outcomes of unresolved quantum states and and we only observe one outcome because we are also splitting in the current version of us is only one of many buses that experiences one world at a time. And then you've got a bunch of other theories to basically these interpretations make exactly the same physical predictions no matter which one of them is correct. The outcomes of our experiments will be exactly the same. So there's no way to test which one is right and though in a funny turn a ballpoints out. That razor has been invoked both for and against the many worlds interpretation again coming back to the fact that a lot of times. This just comes down to people's intuitive judgments like he quotes the quantum theorist Roland omnibus quote. As far as the economy of thought is concerned. There never was anything in the history of thought. So bluntly contrary to outcomes rule than Everett's many worlds on the other hand you've got a a modern physicist Sean Carroll of Caltech who advocates the many worlds interpretation specifically because he argues it's the simplest interpretation of quantum theory. He says it doesn't make any additional assumptions. It's the simplest way you can map the theory onto reality the weird thing about About this too is that I feel like at this point if you consume enough science fiction and not into science fiction but general just popular culture. The worlds interpretation has been at used at least casually so often then in a way it it feels slightly more plausible just because just due to which I realize is not a scientific argued like you could reasonably say well. I lean towards many worlds interpretation. Because that's how the X. men were my favorite. Tv show uses it. GotTa be real. Yeah but on on some level it's still kinda gets into you. It still affects you. I agree I mean again. I think this is this is pointing out. Some of the weaknesses in how outcomes razor is often applied. It's like people think they're applying some kind of objective criterion when really. They're just kind of going with their gut of what what feels more plausible And that's something ball hammered home at the end when he writes quote but this is all just special. Pleading all comes razor was never meant for pairing nature down to some beautiful parsimonious core of truth because scientists so difficult and messy the allure of a philosophical tool for clearing a path or pruning. The thickets is obvious in the readiness to find spurious applications of outcomes razor in the history of science or to enlist dismiss reshape. The razor at will to shore up their preferences. Scientists reveal their seduction by this vision but they should resist it. The value of keeping assumptions to a minimum is cognitive. Not onto logical. It helps you think a theory is not better if it is simpler but it might well be more useful and that counts for much more Yeah that's well put. It helps us think rather than help us explain the world right. There's no way to show that well actually. So we're we're about to get into somebody who says there may be cases where you can show simpler. Theories are objectively more true but ball argues that at least most of the time in science in real competing theories in the history of science. It's not that simpler theories are more true or explain reality better. They're just easier to get your head around and test all right on that note. We're GONNA take one more break but we will be right back with further discussion of the razor. Hey I'm andy if you don't know me it's probably because I'm not famous but I did start a men's grooming company called Harry's the idea for Harry's came out of a frustrating experience I had buying razor blades..

Sean Carroll ball Hugh Everett physicist Harry Copenhagen Roland omnibus Caltech
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

13:23 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"Yeah this is one of your summer reading picks. I think yeah. It's really good. It's one of those books. You may think you already. You know you've already read a quantum physics book. You know you know the basics you know you know the the what the interpretations are and all that. I feel like this is one. You can still be newly amazed by learn a lot more from right and true to form as a great science writer ball. I think makes a fantastic case in this article again. Stockrooms razor against a you know a liberal use of it So he starts by saying quote Oxfam's Razor as often stated as an injunction not to make more assumptions than you absolutely need and in that way it it's almost a truism right. I mean like when when you phrase it that way who would say well. Yeah no I wanNA make more assumptions. Yeah I mean you can come back to a forensic example right and detective work which I even. Carl Sagan makes discusses this a lot like marrying science to a to the work of a detective. Like how many hypotheses do you need for a murder? And you know there's going to you're going to be the obvious ones that You know especially the outcomes are going to be the primary candidates that it was someone. The victim knew that it was like a spouse or a friend etc rather than inventing wild scenarios with no evidence to base them on right saying you know certainly getting into possible scenarios like maybe it was the random work of a serial murderer. Surreal murders exist. This does happen from time to time but is it the most likely scenario and then that's not even getting into wilder possibilities like will perhaps it was an assassin a spy? Who took them for another person? Well that's possible too but again far more steps that are necessary. The shorter trip is the more likely right and in terms of not making more assumptions than you need ball writes that this is of course. Good advice if you're trying to come up with a good explanation for something. You add nothing by writing in a bunch of extra complications. That don't help the explanation. Explain anything more than it did. When it was simpler. They should explanation. Should be as simple as they can be without losing power to explain and predict quote. That's why most scientific theories are intentional. Simplifications they ignore some effects. Not because they don't happen. But because they're thought to have a negligible effect on the outcome. Applied this way. Simplicity is a practical virtue allowing a clearer view of what's most important in a phenomenon. So again he saying there that optimus razor. It's not necessarily that comes razor tells you what's true but outcomes razor makes theories useful because then he goes on to argue. The dotcoms razor is quote fetish is and misapplied as a guiding beacon for scientific inquiry. So he thinks whatever you know what we're just saying. Simplicity is virtue of theories and explanations because they make theories clearer easier to use. But it's dangerous to jump from that to the assumption that simplicity is actually a measure of truth quote here. The the implication is the simplest theory isn't just more convenient but gets closer to how nature really works in other words. It's more probably the correct. One Ball says this is wrong. Simplicity does not actually tell you anything about which theories are right and which ones are wrong. he argues. There's really no reason to believe that. Simpler theories better described nature than complicated ones and he gives a few examples. He talks about Francis. Crick warning against trying to apply comes razor as a critical tool for theories in biology because biology gets really messy. Andy cites examples were kind of lead. Us Astray like he he cites a Alfred. Kempe's eighteen seventy nine proof of the four color theorem in mathematics which was kind of favored for a while. Because the proof was considered very simple and very elegant. But it turned out to be wrong. You know very roughly here. It makes me think of something we talked about. Before on the show about how How evolution is often kind of a miser it's often cheap And so part of that you could. You could apply the simplicity model to that and say okay it's That means it tends to take the shortest route tends to to perhaps engaging simplicity but at the same time it's kind of lazy and lazy can create these sort of. Yeah we're and we're like some biological structure has evolved for one thing but then ends up getting partially abandoned and then reused for something else and it can get it can get messy. It can get complicated. A million years of shortcuts can turn into a quite circuitous route. Yes yeah and So Ball writes that. In his view he has not found a single case in the history of Science. Where comes razor was actually used to settle a debate between rival theories so I just want to make sure that his distinction is coming through. He is saying it's useful for trying to make theories easier to talk about easier to understand easier to apply but when it comes between competing theories trying to say which one is more true which one makes better predictions. He is not found a single case. Where COMES RAZOR? Was the decisive factor. In what's worse? He says a lot of people have tried to retroactively. Apply comes razor to historical scientific debates where it was not in fact. Decisive in reality Andy sites as an example a debate. We've already discussed the GEO centric versus the heliocentric solar system and I thought his take on. This was really interesting because I had been taken in. I had previously thought. We'll maybe a really good case of outcomes. Razor is heliocentric winning over Geo Centrism because yeah you with Geo Centrism. You just had to make all these weird assumptions about the movements of plan. You have to do extra work to make it fit right. That's what I thought. But he actually digs into the debate of the time. Ballpoints out that in reality we talked about one of the big things being all these episode cycles that in the Ptolemaic model the Geo centric view the planets go round the earth. But they don't just go around. They make all these weird loops and stuff called EPI cycles. You had to build that. In in order to explain what astronomers saw in the night sky of the planets appearing to regress they'd go back and forth and stuff so so he says we've got these EPI cycles but ball points out that in reality the Copernican model. That was being argued about. In Galileo's day that heliocentric model was also full of EPA cycles and this was because Copernicus was not aware of what Johannes kepler would later discover about the orbits of Planetary Bodies Being Elliptical rather than circular so because he lacked that crucial assumption that that important part of the theory copernicus also had to build weird little loops into his heliocentric model of the solar system he got the heliocentric right but he thought the planet's removing imperfect circles that didn't match observations either so like Ptolemy he he cheated he put all these loops in there to make the model work outright and it wasn't until heliocentric was combined with Kepler in elliptical orbits that the EPA cycles were finally banished and based on this ball argues that there was really no way at the time to suggest that the COPERNICAN system was simpler. In fact he points out that Copernicus invokes a number of weird nonscientific assumptions in support of his model for example quote in his main work on the heliocentric theory day revolutioanry bus Oh I'M GONNA have trouble with this one day revolutioin abyss or B. M. Selenium He argued that it was proper for the sun to sit at the center quote as if resting on kingly thrown in governing the stars like a wise ruler. That doesn't sound like a very scientific criterion. No I mean maybe his kind of breaking it down for people you know what I mean. Of course he did turn out to be right but like the the the the that seems like an unjustified assumption based on what he knew at the time Ball also points out that by the time kepler comes around. We're no longer in a situation of competing theories trying to explain the same observations because Kepler had access to better observations quote the point. Here is that as a tool for distinguishing between rival theories. Autumn's razor is only relevant if the two theories predict identical results but one is simpler than the other which is to say. It makes fewer assumptions. This is a situation rarely if ever encountered in science much more often theories are distinguished by making fewer assumptions but different ones. It's then not obvious how to weigh them up. I think this is a fantastic point right. I mean come back to the aquatic ape like that that is one of these rare situations. I think that seems to match up making additional assumptions. And it's like Oh yeah we would have to keep those traits later anyway. You know we'd need explanations for that. It just seems like it's making more assumptions. But that's almost never how it goes. Usually the assumption is just different assumptions. And then how do you know which assumption is simpler than the other one right? The the the whole aquatic eight section of the of presumed evolutionary advancement is kind of its own at the cycle. Yeah exactly remove because there's an episode cycle in this theory but not in this one exactly. Yes I mean if you're trying to look at like not a additional assumptions in theory but just different assumptions in theory even cases where to us. It might seem obvious one way or another which one seems simpler. It's not always obvious to people at the time He he brings up The question of Darwinian evolution is descent from a common ancestor more or less complicated than the idea of divine created. Order common descent. I think that would seem like less complicated theory too many of us today but would it have seemed simpler to the world view of people who were debating common descent in the mid late nineteenth century. Who already got a theistic worldview? That's basically built in assumption right right. Yeah yeah a lot of this does come down again coming to where we spoke about earlier regarding the basic religious argument coming from a really religious background. We've had this This the idea the reality of a God hammered into you and then presented with With with the atheist argument you know you may say well. No that that is that requires far. They're at so many episodes in your your atheism where my my faith is just a clear and straightforward as a whistle. I mean people did actually argue that way. They'd say look at all this weird stuff you have to assume about the history of life and all I believe is there's a divine created order. Yeah I mean it's like a bumper sticker thing like What God God wrote it? I believe it story three steps. I mean that yes it is. Simplicity is often in the eye of the beholder. Like you don't have A. There are some people who would argue their cases where you can try to mathematically quantify Complications or suctions or simplicity. But in general. That's really hard to do. You don't have an objective measure that you can apply from the outside a lot of times it's just GonNa be kind of fuzzy qualitative judgments what what seems like less of assumption. You lack an objective. Measure people go with their intuitions And this does not seem like a good recipe for sorting between theory is so coming back again to two balls formulation of volumes razor is basically like if you have two theories that are competing to explain the same things that make all the same predictions and explain them equally. Well yeah they explain. They make the same predictions. Explain things equally well But one of them has more assumptions. You go with one with fewer assumptions but ball argues that you almost never in reality get cases where the predictions of two theories are exactly the same instead quote scientific models that differ in their assumptions typically make slightly different predictions to it. Is these predictions not the criteria of simplicity that are of the greatest use for evaluating rival theories again? I think this is a good point. I E theories almost never predict the exact same thing so why not just judge them on how good their predictions are Finally he writes that he can only think of one real instance in In science where there are rival theories that make exactly the same predictions on the basis of quote easily. Innumerable incomparable assumptions. And this one example he can think of is the different interpretations of quantum mechanics. Which I think is a fantastic example. That did not come to my mind but I think he's exactly right about this So we've discussed interpretations of quantum mechanics on the show before we're not going to go deep on that but just for a very short refresher basically we know that the mathematical fundamentals of quantum theory are correct. They make extremely good predictions. Like we know the theories right. But there's a problem. They predict a world of probability is not of certainties. So if you have a theory that and electron will be fifty percent in one state and fifty percent in an opposite state but we only ever observe physical reality. Embodying one.

Razor Johannes kepler Andy Carl Sagan Copernicus Oxfam writer EPA ball murder Geo Centrism Crick Kempe Francis Ptolemy Autumn
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

13:20 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"The NFL. All right. We're back all right. So we've been talking about this principle known as autumn's razor that we've described already is the idea that simpler hypotheses are better than more complex. Hypotheses there are a number of ways you can formulate it. But it's the principle that's been referred back to actually since probably before William Vodka it is I think a principal that somewhat predates him and intellectual history. Right he did not he did not create something that was not already Utilized by other thinkers of the day and thinkers before him One great example of somebody. Not Before William of autumn but later articulating similar ideas Isaac Newton in his great work the Principia Mathematica from sixteen eighty seven Newton writes quote. We're to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances So a similar ideas. There's no need to add extra explanations when you already have an explanation that is number one. True and number two explains everything you see right. So an example of this might be Why do the Planets Orbit The Sun? This would be something that Newton would be concerned with. Newton would say okay. We know of two forces the explain what we see. Gravity and inertia inertia is the tendency of an object in motion to stay in motion. Gravity is the mutually attracting force between two objects with mass. So because of inertia the plan it's flying through space. WanNa keep travelling in a straight line at a constant speed and because of gravity instead of travelling straight line their path bins around toward the sun they travel and so the those two things are both true and they explain everything we observe not now actually not quite everything but they were good enough for Newton's time explaining everything you might also say though that may be in addition to gravity and inertia there are angels that guide the planets in their orbits because those elliptical pathways are pleasing to the Lord. But if somebody proposes that you're you're kind of stuck because there's no way to prove the angel hypothesis wrong you can't say there aren't invisible angels guiding the planets but pretty much everybody today. I think even people who believe in angels in in some sense would not see any reason to believe that there were angels doing that because there are other explanations. Which do all the explaining that needs to be done right? Yeah I mean once you've drag angels into it too. It opens up the door for just a never ending list of reasons why the angels can't be detected or why the you know why the angel wondered why the planet seems to be behaving this way. That's in accordance with these laws rather than the machinations of an divine being right. And you don't need to appeal in any way to the additional plausibility of angels are not like the reason. I said that even people who otherwise believe in angels don't say that they're guiding the motions of the planets is. You don't need them to explain that right now. You've just got basic laws of physics. That explain what the planets are doing. There's no reason to add an angel's explanation. It doesn't do any more work. It doesn't even help angels out right now. I mean Yeah it's there's just no point in it now of course sticking on the theory of like the motions of the planets for minute of course we would have to later come up with a more refined theory of gravity for those rare cases where. Newton's theory of gravity would fail and we would get that with Einstein. In general relativity which re characterized gravity is the curvature of space time caused by formation due to mass rather than as a mutually attractive force between objects though in most cases if you think of it as a force in in the Newtonian sense your predictions work out just fine but from an article that I I wanNA refer to later by a philosopher named Elliott Sober He writes quote Albert. Einstein spoke for many when he said quote it can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience. Which in a way is again articulating. Something like comes razor it saying like you want the simplest possible explanation. That explains everything. And if we're sticking with Einstein for minute To go beyond positing something like angels. If if you want to go into real scientific hypotheses in history there are all kinds of things that you might argue sort of done away with by an outcomes razor ish kind of process though I think there are some historians and philosophers of science than my disagree there but one example that comes to mind is the luminaries ether you know. It was once believed by many scientists that there had to be a medium in space through which light propagates right. The same way that if you want sound to. Propagate there's no sound in space right you've gotta have sound traveling through a medium like air or like water or like a you know a steel wire. There must be mattered to transmit that energy and so the idea was that space was filled with this stuff this either. That light waves propagated through and eventually due to Einstein into other thinkers and experiments. It started to become clear that the ether was superfluous. You didn't need it to explain any of the properties of light now. There's another example from history. That often comes up when people talk about outcomes razor. It's often brought up as a great example of razor being applied But we're GONNA get to an article later on that. I think has presents a pretty devastating case against this being true but just to set it up here it is the idea of comparing the Ptolemaic universe versus the Copernican universe. Which obviously this argument was brought to a a a very dramatic end In the life of Galileo right Galileo got into big trouble with the inquisition for among other things. They're also politics involved. But for among other things advocating the Kernigan model over the Ptolemaic Model For simplicity sake the COPERNICAN model of the solar system. Was Of course the one we know to be more basically correct not totally correct but more correct because it was heliocentric them Sun at the center of the solar system and argued that the other planets including the earth rotated around the Sun This of course was not the Orthodox astronomy of the day. The more favoured models were the traditional toll make model which had the earth at the center in the the planets going around the earth in these strange kind of Spiro graph patterns that had these things called EPI cycles where they would sort of stop and then do a circle in another circle and loops within their their traveling And then you had some compromise models like the model of Tyco BRI now the the traditional argument here in favor of saying you know copernicus and Galileo were on the side of Adams Razor I it would go something like well the the ptolemaic system and the and the Taiko Brahim models. They've got all this extra stuff. You need to assume all these weird extra like like EPI cycles like the plan going around in loops and it's not explain exactly why they're doing that. You just have to insert the loops in order to make it match. Rx Our observations therefore the Ptolemaic model was more complex We'll come back to that later on. Because I think now it's GonNa be important to get into some criticisms of comes razor. You know if you go into a special kind of skeptic communities on the Internet you might sometimes see people treating outcomes razor as if it is some kind of law of nature like referring to raise her in the same way you might refer to proven theories about reality Such as the equations describing the action of gravity or something and so I think while welcomes razor is an interesting and sometimes useful. Skeptical INS TO APPLY. It is not in fact a law of nature and there are a couple of major branches of criticisms of yield razor I think the I would be like accusations that it is often misunderstood or misused and then second there would be actual attacks on the usefulness of the razor even when it is in its supposedly true form now. The first thing would be pretty simple. And it's just the idea that all comes. Razor is misunderstood misquoted. Misconstrued misused I actually I came across a funny blog. Post that of all things pointed to a quote from a mystery writer named Harlan Coburn More mystery writers Yeah I'm not familiar with this writer but I thought this was interesting. This would you know it was just an example of somebody saying no. You're not using all comes razor right. This writer wrote quote. Most people oversimplify autumn's razor to mean the simplest answer is usually correct but the real meaning with the Franciscan Friar William of Aachen really wanted to emphasize is that you shouldn't complicate that you shouldn't stack a theory. If a simpler explanation was at the Ready Parrot. Down Prune the excess. And so I think looking at it this way. This fits more with like the The version that we were talking about with Isaac Newton Right It's not necessarily a statement about simplicity as a general principle but saying you shouldn't stack things that explain the same outcomes on top of each other because you get no extra usefulness out of that Another example that I was just thinking of. That's come up on the show. Before is the idea of aquatic ape. Theory Oh yes. This is the idea that among other things humans are hairless because for a our ancestors lived in at least partially in the water. The ideas you look at a lot of our body features are relatively smooth skin bipedal ISM layers of subcutaneous fat The abilities of vocal cords all all kinds of things like that. The proponents of aquatic ape theory. Say We've got all these strange anatomical morphological features that are not the same as other great apes. Why do we have those qualities? I think you could explain them all if humans wants needed to be in the water so they need to be smooth smooth skin in order to be aerodynamic swimmers and they became bipedal so that they could wait around in the water and you come up with a list of explanations along these lines that they would argue all point to an aquatic ancestry. But there's a wrinkle their because of course if that's all true the question is then. Why did we retain all those features? After leaving the water. Humans are not in aquatic species. Now I mean we can go into the water but water is not a primary Environmental Niche so. What you know. How can we still have all those features? And the the aquatic ape theorists might say. Oh well once you came onto the land. It actually was useful to be bipedal for these other reasons. He sent away hairless for these other reasons. Which means you could cut out Ben. Entire step of having to be in the water stick with these are useful for living on the land. Exactly you might apply autumn here and say those features turn out to be useful on land. Why wouldn't they just evolve on land in the first place right? So there is like you've been in creating or or redirecting to the the hypothesis that is one enormous steps shorter. Yeah SO AQUATIC APE THEORY. I think is one of those things that like. It would be hard to completely disprove. I think that there is no physical evidence pointing toward it. It would be hard to say. This is impossible to have happened. But there's just no reason to assume it it just it just like ads in an extra step of explanations that don't explain anything any better than other explanations could. Yeah I mean it's kind of like if I come home from work and I have say beer and bread. Maybe I started to places to get the beer in the bread. I got the beer at one place in the bread of the other but I also probably just stopped at one store to get both of them. Both likely one is a short trip. I feel like you would also have to add something. It kind of extravagant. Though it'd be like a you stopped at the way home and you entered a raffle contest in which one beer and bread and then you also may have stopped at the store to get something else but right yeah stole dear inbred as like when the simple explanation is pr-. I probably just bought your bread. Yeah or beer and bread was was placed in my car by a mysterious stranger. These are things that are possible and could conceivably be the reason that I have beer and bread in the car but a razor slices away. The unnecessary steps the less likely steps for the short trip between point A. and point B. Right and I think in cases like that you could say the doctors razor doesn't necessarily prove a theory wrong but it is kind of a useful heuristic. It might help you use your intellectual time wisely right And that gets us to the next step. Which is the the more comprehensive criticism? The idea that autumn is maybe in fact wrong or not useful. I think in some cases this criticism is true. So maybe we should get into it a bit. The first article I wanted to look at is called the tyranny of simple explanations and it was published in the Atlantic. It was written by the science writer. Philip Ball one of my favorite current science writers who wrote the book beyond weird a really fantastic book that I recommended last summer..

Isaac Newton writer Einstein Razor NFL William Vodka Aachen Galileo principal Philip Ball Elliott Sober Atlantic Wan Tyco BRI Spiro Harlan Coburn Albert
"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

Stuff To Blow Your Mind

11:45 min | 1 year ago

"razor" Discussed on Stuff To Blow Your Mind

"Robert Lamb and Joe McCormick. The today we're going to discuss a problem solving principle that many of you probably heard of and we've we've definitely referenced on the show before and that is autumn's razor that's right. It's it's one of the classics one of the hits of like the skeptical toolkit and I think it's a really one to get into because it's something that is widely known but in different ways and often To whatever extent it actually does have value. It often gets deployed in ways that do not actually make use of its value right like like an actual razor blade. It may be misused from time to time. Yes now. What one specific place that. I know we've talked about it before. Is that is in the context of Carl? Sagan's recommendations for the the tools of skeptical thinking he these out and one of them is autumn's razor. He writes all comes razor this convenient rule of thumb urges us when faced with two hypotheses that explain the data equally well to choose the simpler. Okay now why did we end up talking about this today? We we were in the studio the other day Discussing upcoming episodes. And you said that. Seth had mentioned this our producer Seth Yeah. I was in here and set a nickel Johnson was working on. A crossword puzzle was at the New York. Times he tells us it was the New York Times And he he asked me how to spell. Autumn is in razor and I took a guess at it and I can't I can't remember. I was correct. I was probably wrong but also probably hit one of the multiple acceptable spell things for razor But anyway we started talking about it and I was like. Oh Yeah we we could do that as an episode and so here we are. I'm very glad we picked this because I think one of my personal favorite genres of of critical thinking is is being skeptical about the tools of skepticism. You know is sometimes people who identify skeptics can ca- can I get a little cocky. You know they get a little too sure of themselves about what the reasoning tools they use and it's worth putting those tools to the test. Giving them a closer look. Yeah absolutely now I have to say I definitely remember. The first time I encountered the concept of outcomes raise or at least the first time I encountered it and it on some level stuck with me and that was when viewed the Nineteen ninety-seven film adaptation of Carl Sagan's novel contact the movie. I can't watch without crying. Oh Yeah Yeah Yeah well. Why does it make you cry? Oh God there's no point especially the first part where you know it. Zooms out from the earth and you're hearing the radio signals go back in time and then and then it shows the young. L. E. Airway experimenting with the Ham Radio and her dad's helping her and get so emotional. Yeah Yeah it's it's been a very long I. I haven't seen it since initially came out and in fact the main thing I remember from it is seen in which jodie foster's character. Eleanor Airway has having this conversation with Matthew mcconaughey as character. Who How old was Matthew mcconaughey at this point? I don't even know how old he is. Now is this ageless demon but anyway. Here's this character He's scared Palmer. Joss in the scene in question foster's character brings up autumn's razor in a discussion on the nature of God she. She says well which is ultimately the simpler hypothesis that an all powerful God exists or the human beings made got up in order to feel better about things and then this ultimately comes back around is kind of flipped on her later on film regarding her characters encounter with an extraterrestrial intelligence right. Is it more likely that she really had the experience? She thinks she had with With all these aliens or that. She like hallucinated. Something that would give her emotional closure. Yeah and so. Yeah I think I was in high school at the time so it was. It was interesting concept especially in the context of of atheism verses of faith in a creator deity inserted to suddenly have this tool from the chest. Skeptical thinking just thrown up on the table and you and seemingly used by both sides. Well Yeah I think this is funny. This is a great example because it highlights some of the most common features of all comes razor as it is actually used to like. It's often invoked in a kind of fuzzy way without an objective measure Just kind of invoked to back up your intuitions about the probability of something right but another thing is that this example shows how. It's not always easy to find a way to compare the simplicity of two different propositions like is the existence of God a simple hypothesis or a complicated one that I think that really depends on kind of how you feel about it like like what kind of objective measure can you come up with to evaluate that question right. It's GonNa depend so much on your like your background your culture what you grew up with. And you know how you how you've come to view the possibility of Of God's existence. Is it just kind of the bedrock of your your worldview or is it this thing from the outside that you are contemplating and also how do you view it at like the coherence of the idea? Do you view it as something. That's like That's full of all these little kind of ad hoc accommodations or something that is a holistic coherent Sort of like fact about nature. Yeah you know I it's I I think this is a perfect example. That shows like win. People used the idea volumes razor in a way that is not helpful and doesn't really doesn't really get you any closer to figuring out what's true now if you're if you're still questioning what the concept really means. Don't worry we will get to some. I think some very understandable examples of how it can be a used properly and used improperly. But let's go ahead and just start about the concept itself the the word autumn You know where this comes from. We'll get to the origins of autumn's razor so Oxfam's razor is also known as the principle of parsimony and parsimony means a tendency towards cheapness or frugality. So I like that. It's like the principle of parsimony is like you. You want to be cheap with your with your logic right yeah. I don't need more than two steps of logic between me and the solution. Don't give me one with four or five. And it was named after the Medieval English philosopher William of autumn. Of course William of Arkham So he he lived in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries from twelve eighty five to either thirteen seven or thirteen forty nine. I've seen different death dates given forum. I've seen different birthdates as well. Eighty seven twelve. Eighty eight looking at That's interesting so he was a prolific scholar. Franciscan friar we'll get more into his ideas in a minute. I you know one thing I've always wondered is where the heck is awesome. I've never heard of that. Well yeah because the word sound has kind of like a remoteness to it. It sounds alien in some ways. Autumn is very much a real place. It is a rural village. In Surrey England. You can look it up online. You can find that the website for the church in Oxfam for example and this area has been occupied since ancient times. It's about a day's ride south west of London and it was the birthplace of the individual who'd come to be known as William Volume now beyond that beyond the fact that he was born here. We don't know a lot about William's life We don't know what his social or family background was or if his native language was French or Middle English. As Paul Vincent Spadea explains in the Cambridge companion to Arkham he was likely given over to the Franciscan order as a young boy. Before the age of fourteen and here Latin would have quickly become his language of not only writing but also just conversation Grey Friars Convent in. London was likely his home convent but later he traveled he visited Avalon he visited Italy and he lived the last two decades of his life in Germany. Now philosophically William was a Nominal List and spayed writes that the two main themes of this for William were the rejection of universals and ontological reduction in these two teams are are not necessarily interconnected like you can you. Could you could believe in one but not the other and vice versa but basically like let's get into what these mate so the first rejection of universals is perhaps best considered and this is very brief and broad Certainly you can find so much written in instead on this topic but basically think of it as a rejection of the tonic idea of the realm of forms. So that idea that all chairs that we might make design and carve a symbol are an attempt to create the perfect chair which doesn't reside in our world but only resides within this realm of forms. So all chairs that we create our like an aspiration for the ideal chair another way. I've thought about it at least as I understood it was. The nominalism is kind of the idea that there is no such thing as a chair. There's only this chair and that chair in this chair over here. There is no chair right like this. This is the kind of the situation gets too. When you you get into the genre classifications of say albums artists or movies. You care a great deal about and someone tries to limit it to a classification and say oh well that's classic rock where that's alternative rock near like. No no no no no. Don't don't try and fit there is there. Is these categories. Do not apply. There is there is only you know whatever. Your band of choice happens to be. There is only tool. There is only primis or whatever right there yeah there. There is only things not category right. Now let's move onto the second theme here. Ontological reduction this is as Britannica defines it quote the metaphysical doctrine that entities of a certain kind are in reality collections or combinations of entities of simpler or more basic kind. I think your classic example here is molecules atoms. Yeah so another example. Here's while our aristotle defined ten categories of objects that might be apprehended by a human mind. These would have been translations vary on on how you wanted to find these but substance quantity quality relative place time attitude condition action and affection. William cut these down to two substance and quality. He's really getting in there. That's the razor. That's what a razor Dutt. Cia slices away. It cuts off the fat and gets down to the meat. Spayed writes quote. Although these two strands of thinking are independent. They are nevertheless often viewed as joint effects of a more fundamental. Concern the principle of parsimony known as Oxfam's razor okay. So we're getting to the razor. Yeah so William. Devoted a lot of energy to arguing against What spade calls the bloated onto logical in inventories of his contemporaries and became well known to his peers for this as such either towards the end of his life or shortly after his death a kind of greatest hits album came out on his thoughts and ideas titled On the Principles of Theology? Now it wasn't actually by William of Arkham but it featured his doctrine as well as verbatim quotes there is no ascribed author either so later generations would often just attribute it to him as well as the notion of outcomes razor however the specific phrase was apparently never actually used by him. He never said autumn in the house. I'M GONNA get the razor out and started carving on some some some some some ideas here no..

William Volume Seth Yeah Oxfam Carl Sagan Arkham razor Dutt jodie foster London Matthew mcconaughey New York Times Eleanor Airway New York Robert Lamb Grey Friars Convent Cia Johnson Paul Vincent Spadea Joe McCormick Palmer
"razor" Discussed on Mickstape: The Barstool Basketball Podcast

Mickstape: The Barstool Basketball Podcast

01:50 min | 3 years ago

"razor" Discussed on Mickstape: The Barstool Basketball Podcast

"And in that next seen usually it's guide shaven probably was some shitty razor with lasers attached yuck but in a in a in a rail worlds you cut to a sane to a guy used in his his is crisp fresh new razor from dollar shave club kqm dollarshaveclub dot com is way you'd procure such a razor they deliver everything you need to look feel and smell all your very best when wrong on i dunno owns look fillon smell pretty good my very best that by deriving thing for that nope uh on okay best it is the and did are at a puppet as more than just razors dollar shave club is better than shopping on a store in a store to honest star is way better than that rooftops were osce division dollar shave club as every bang and i do mean everything you need to look smell and feel your best champ oooo body washed toothpaste all the things that will help you reach that level kaw and of course the best razors i've ever used pick here by far yeah it's not it there's no close second the blinder's used these raisin i get an amazing high quality shave every morning for my dollar shave club executive razor executive such a nice word it really is i can be our shaving light middleman difference razor no i want the executive at razor like if if if our title was changed to like executive twitter's like i i.

blinder executive razor twitter