Otto’s razor: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
}}{{dsh razor quote}}
}}{{dsh razor quote}}


A rule of thumb, attributed to 19th century Austrian plowright [''playwright? — Ed''] {{buchstein}}, in his play {{Dsh}} ([[Die Schweizer Heulsuse|“The Swiss Milquetoast”]]) that recommends when there are plausible alternative explanations for a person’s behaviour, one should choose the simplest-''minded'', preferring cloth-headedness or coincidence over the artful application of intelligence or inspiration (for beneficent actions), or “malice, spite, or virtue” (for odious ones).
A rule of thumb, attributed to 19th century Austrian plowright [''playwright? — Ed''] {{buchstein}}, in his play {{Dsh}} ([[Die Schweizer Heulsuse|“The Swiss Milquetoast”]]) that recommends when there are plausible alternative explanations for an outcome, one should choose the simplest-''minded'', preferring cloth-headedness or coincidence over the artful application of high-mindedness, intelligence or inspiration.
 
Otto’s razor is a corollary to Hanlon’s razor: where Hanlon cautions against imputing malice for incompetence, {{buchstein}} cautions against awarding ''credit''.


{{quote|
{{quote|
{{otto’s razor}}}}
{{otto’s razor}}}}


Until the contrary is proven, treat both the pinnacles of success and the chasms of calumny as the produce of ''accident'' and not intention. Give the benefit of the doubt to wrong-doers for deeds that present as wilful, and withhold it from do-gooders for their strokes of uncommon genius, until such time as there is no other realistic way of explaining them.
Putting the two razors together (“[[Büchstein’s twin-blade razor]]”) we get the following: until the contrary is proven, treat both the pinnacles of success and the chasms of calumny as the produce of ''accident'' and not intention. Give the benefit of the doubt to wrong-doers for deeds that present as wilful, and withhold it from do-gooders for their strokes of uncommon genius, until there is no other realistic way of explaining them.


{{dsh}} was a light-hearted comic farce, but (until the dengue fever got him) [[Büchstein]] took his aphorism seriously — he would credit it, when drunk, to Goethe, Schiller or even Aristotle — and would gleefully point out to disbelieving dinner guests celebrated monuments to human triumph and notorious stains of monstrous wickedness that in fact came about by more or less fortunate adjacency, and not intelligent design.  
{{dsh}} was a light-hearted comic farce, but (until the dengue fever got him) [[Büchstein]] took his aphorism seriously — he would credit it, when drunk, to Goethe, Schiller or even Aristotle — and would gleefully point out to disbelieving dinner guests celebrated monuments to human triumph and notorious stains of monstrous wickedness that in fact came about by more or less fortunate adjacency and not intelligent design.  


Indeed it is a healthy, skeptical disposition to take into the world, and those who find uncanny success would do well to bear it in mind.
The twin-blade razor is a healthy sceptical disposition to take into the world. [[Paula Vennells|Those who find uncommon success that defies outward explanation]] would do well to bear it in mind.


In a sad irony, by the time his “razor” caught on, [[Büchstein]] was deep in series of debilitating, Papaya-juice inflected hallucinations from which he did not recover.<ref>A poultice made from a preparation of papaya and coconut was a popular treatment for Dengue fever at the time.</ref>  
In a sad irony, by the time his “razor” caught on, [[Büchstein]] was deep in series of debilitating, Papaya-juice inflected hallucinations from which he did not recover.<ref>A poultice made from a preparation of papaya and coconut was a popular treatment for Dengue fever at the time.</ref>  
This is just as well, for the ironies multiplied thereafter: assuming the pithiness of Büchstein’s text to be just such an accidental epiphany, colonial jurist Albert Hanlon nicked it, rebadging (and, frankly, improving) it to read “do not attribute to malice things that can just as well be explained by stupidity” and that is how it has remained, as “[[Hanlon’s razor]]”, to this day.<ref>None of this is true. Not a word.</ref>


{{Sa}}
{{Sa}}
*[[Hanlon’s razor]]
*[[Occam’s razor]]
*[[Occam’s razor]]
*{{buchstein}}
*{{buchstein}}
{{ref}}
{{ref}}

Revision as of 11:14, 2 June 2024

Office anthropology™


Die Schweizer Heulsuse at the Donmar Warehouse during Lockdown
The JC puts on his pith-helmet, grabs his butterfly net and a rucksack full of marmalade sandwiches, and heads into the concrete jungleIndex: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

Herculio: ’Tis neither malice, spite, nor virtue
Whose ledger swells, or plucks, the seedy fruits of progress —
But mainly accident.
Lest thee with surety know aught else —
Withhold thy assignations.

Triago: Pish upon thee, Nuncle. Pish!
Dost thou mean to say
Things peel this way
Through doughty misadventure?

Herculio: Peradventure —

Triago: Pish abeam!
Has thou no more to say than that?
Wouldst thou on this shaky surmise
Withhold rebuke?

Herculio: Perchance, per case, mayhap dear Triago
’Twas but a fluke?

Triago: O! This nuisant planet weighs upon my soul!

Herculio: If ’tis this and nought beside
That flies you to a vernal rage
Our fickle globe in its manifold confound’ry
Lies prettily indeed
For thy alignment.

A rule of thumb, attributed to 19th century Austrian plowright [playwright? — Ed] Büchstein, in his play Die Schweizer Heulsuse (“The Swiss Milquetoast”) that recommends when there are plausible alternative explanations for an outcome, one should choose the simplest-minded, preferring cloth-headedness or coincidence over the artful application of high-mindedness, intelligence or inspiration.

Otto’s razor is a corollary to Hanlon’s razor: where Hanlon cautions against imputing malice for incompetence, Büchstein cautions against awarding credit.

Never attribute to virtue something that could equally be attributed to self-interest; never attribute to skill something that could equally be attributed to dumb luck.

Putting the two razors together (“Büchstein’s twin-blade razor”) we get the following: until the contrary is proven, treat both the pinnacles of success and the chasms of calumny as the produce of accident and not intention. Give the benefit of the doubt to wrong-doers for deeds that present as wilful, and withhold it from do-gooders for their strokes of uncommon genius, until there is no other realistic way of explaining them.

Die Schweizer Heulsuse was a light-hearted comic farce, but (until the dengue fever got him) Büchstein took his aphorism seriously — he would credit it, when drunk, to Goethe, Schiller or even Aristotle — and would gleefully point out to disbelieving dinner guests celebrated monuments to human triumph and notorious stains of monstrous wickedness that in fact came about by more or less fortunate adjacency and not intelligent design.

The twin-blade razor is a healthy sceptical disposition to take into the world. Those who find uncommon success that defies outward explanation would do well to bear it in mind.

In a sad irony, by the time his “razor” caught on, Büchstein was deep in series of debilitating, Papaya-juice inflected hallucinations from which he did not recover.[1]

See also

References

  1. A poultice made from a preparation of papaya and coconut was a popular treatment for Dengue fever at the time.