Pynchon name-checked by Michiko--this random world--in conspiracy debunking book

[david meyer]

history is full of unlikely outcomes, victories, defeats. . .

occam's razor is not law.

On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 10:17 AM, Robert Mahnke <rpmahnke at gmail.com> wrote:

> Occam's Razor doesn't say that the simplest explanation is always right,
> just that it's most likely to be right.  So some of the conspiracy theories
> will be right.  But which ones?
>
> On 2/16/10, Humberto Torofuerte <strongbool at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think some of these examples touch upon a vital corollary of Occam's
>> razor...which states that one should never attribute to malice that
>> which can just as plausibly be attributed to incompetence.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:40 PM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>> > Been hearing Aaronovitch on the radio.  His thesis has major flaws and
>> is
>> > built around straw men like 9-11as inside job  and the Elders of Zion.
>> He
>> > doesn't have the guts to explore instances when a handful of of voices
>> spoke
>> > out against a conspiracy and were marginalized , then proved right.
>> > Examples: the progressive left said no weapons of Mass destruction , no
>> to
>> > Saddam involvement with 9-11. Danny Schechter, Nouriel Roubini, and Jim
>> > Kunstler very accurately predicted the financial meltdown and described
>> the
>> > criminal fraud that led to this event. A handful of reporters, one from
>> > Fortune questioned the reality of Enron's "success".
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20100217/7d3d963e/attachment.html>