PhilArchive
open access
Why Simpler Arguments are Better
In this paper, I argue that, other things being equal, simpler arguments are better. In other words, I argue that, other things being equal, it is rational to prefer simpler arguments over less simple ones. I sketch three arguments in support of this claim: an argument from mathematical proofs, an argument from scientific theories, and an argument from the conjunction rule.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Later Derivability, Earlier Warrant: A Diachronic Argument for Epistemic Autonomy in Effective Field Theory#692259
- Burdens of proof and the case for unevenness#115570
- On the depth of Wiles's proof of Fermat's Last Theorem#692533
- Rise, and (Impending) Fall of Physics Fundamentalism#772552
- Weakening the Plaintiff’s Case Without Strengthening the Defendant’s#110719
Record · ID 754262
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive