Epsilon Wrote:Logan Darklighter Wrote:Occam's Razor usually defaults to stupidity or incompetence rather than evil, you know. No one wakes up in the morning thinking - "How am I going to be EVIL today!" No - they do evil with the best of intentions thinking they are doing good. It's the classic "law of unintended consequences."
Thus the vast majority of "progressive" positions and programs are explained.
That isn't Occam's Razor. Occam's Razor is whichever explanation requires the fewest assumptions, all else being equal, is to be prefered.
The argument you are looking for is Hanlon's Razor, which goes "Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Ah right. Got the wrong attribution there. Hanlon's Razor was indeed the idea I was shooting for. Not Occam's.
Quote:The fact is that the language in that proposed
law exactly mimics the language that actual murderers have attempted to use in actual court to defend themselves. This is not an error.
Can you give me a link or a cite? I'm not casting doubt, here. I just want to see for myself.
