Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem

Ah, Wikipedia! I think that this post is really just an expansion of the last post. In my readings yesterday I was somehow directed to Occam's Razor. This has basically become the idea that the simplest theory is usually the best; assuming that it takes all evidence into account.

I think this is the theory that I, unknowingly, used when I was a kid. Back then I was often brought to Church and I was probably as strong a believer as a little kid can be (This brings to mind the Anabaptist argument that a child cannot be a believer). Anyways, I was a avid reader and, like many children, I loved dinosaurs. This is where I got in trouble; the stuff I was learning in Church did not make room for dinosaurs (many of whose remains I had personally seen). So, I took it upon myself to see if I could figure it out. I asked my mom and others whether it was possible for the 6 days of creation to actually be billions of years. I was flatly told "No". There was no discussion, there was no explanation. This forced me to actually look at the creation myth, which I will admit is a fascinating story, and decide that it did not take everything into account and must be wrong. Of course, once you stop believing that a god did not create you, you have a hard time following any of the rituals.

I think my argument here is that creationism becomes ridiculously complex if it tries to take everything into account (i.e. God hide the dinosaur bones in the earth), therefore it is probably not correct. I do not know why this is bothering me so much lately. I think religious people just frustrate me.

Z.Monkey

P.S. 'Entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity'