Editing Simplicity (section)

==In philosophy of science==
There is a widespread philosophical presumption that simplicity is a theoretical virtue. This presumption that simpler theories are preferable appears in many guises. Often it remains implicit; sometimes it is invoked as a primitive, self-evident proposition; other times it is elevated to the status of a ‘Principle’ and labeled as such (for example, the 'Principle of Parsimony'.<ref>{{Citation |last=Baker |first=Alan |title=Simplicity |date=2022 |url=https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2022/entries/simplicity/ |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |editor-last=Zalta |editor-first=Edward N. |access-date=2023-04-05 |edition=Summer 2022 |publisher=Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University}}</ref>

According to [[Occam's razor]], all other things being equal, the ''simplest'' theory is most likely true. In other words, simplicity is a meta-scientific criterion by which scientists evaluate competing theories.

A distinction is often made by many persons {{by whom|date=April 2015}} between two senses of simplicity: [[syntactic simplicity]] (the number and complexity of hypotheses), and [[ontological simplicity]] (the number and complexity of things postulated). These two aspects of simplicity are often referred to as [[elegance]] and [[Occam's razor|parsimony]] respectively.<ref>
{{cite encyclopedia
|last= Baker
|first= Alan
|author-link= Alan Baker (philosopher)
|editor-last= Zalta
|editor-first= Edward N.
|editor-link= Edward N. Zalta
|encyclopedia= Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
|title= Simplicity
|url= http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/simplicity/
|access-date= 2015-04-26
|edition= Fall 2013
|date= 2010-02-25
|quote= A distinction is often made between two fundamentally distinct senses of simplicity: syntactic simplicity (roughly, the number and complexity of hypotheses), and ontological simplicity (roughly, the number and complexity of things postulated). [...] These two facets of simplicity are often referred to as ''elegance'' and ''parsimony'' respectively. [...] The terms ‘parsimony’ and ‘simplicity’ are used virtually interchangeably in much of the philosophical literature.
}}
</ref>

[[John von Neumann]] defines simplicity as an important esthetic criterion of scientific models: {{Blockquote|[...] (scientific model) must satisfy certain esthetic criteria - that is, in relation to how much it describes, it must be rather simple. I think it is worth while insisting on these vague terms - for instance, on the use of word rather. One cannot tell exactly how "simple" simple is. [...] Simplicity is largely a matter of historical background, of previous conditioning, of antecedents, of customary procedures, and it is very much a function of what is explained by it.<ref>
{{cite book
|title=The Unity of Knowledge
|last=von Neumann
|first=John
|editor-last=Leary
|editor-first=Lewis
|chapter=Method in the Physical Sciences
|publisher=Garden City
|location=N.J.
|year=1955
}}
</ref>}}