> I don't think I ever consciously apply philosophical principles like ockham's razor when I problem solve or learn. It makes me a little uncomfortable that we're starting with a philosophy, rather than having the system discover things itself. I would be ok with it if there was some parallel between ockham's razor and physics.
Why do you think it is relevant what you do consciously? The only things that you do consciously are those things which your brain is ill-equipped to do. The vast majority of your thinking processes are subconscious, as are the principles that drive your conscious thinking. And I guarantee you, Ockham's razor is in there whether you realize it or not. When things get complicated do you purposefully look for a simpler solution? When trying to understand an unknown situation, do you start with something simple and ad complexity as needed? Ockham's razor.
> I would be ok with it if there was some parallel between ockham's razor and physics.
... there's not?
EDIT: As an AI researcher, I'd be more interested in creating an artificial scientist than "artificial science." So what makes the scientist work? Ockham's razor is at the foundation of that.
Why do you think it is relevant what you do consciously? The only things that you do consciously are those things which your brain is ill-equipped to do. The vast majority of your thinking processes are subconscious, as are the principles that drive your conscious thinking. And I guarantee you, Ockham's razor is in there whether you realize it or not. When things get complicated do you purposefully look for a simpler solution? When trying to understand an unknown situation, do you start with something simple and ad complexity as needed? Ockham's razor.
> I would be ok with it if there was some parallel between ockham's razor and physics.
... there's not?
EDIT: As an AI researcher, I'd be more interested in creating an artificial scientist than "artificial science." So what makes the scientist work? Ockham's razor is at the foundation of that.