Thanks for the link Bill. Here are a couple of paragraphs that I selected:
Common sense plays a role in science. If there are two possibilities that could both be true, it is accepted by science that the most simple, most "common sense" answer is the place to start, and until or unless it is disproved or "wobbly,"[4] it should be given more weight than an answer that breaks common sense until more evidence can be gathered. Mostly this is settled by Occam's Razor, in which case the preferred answer is the one that requires the fewest assumptions.
The bolded emphasis was added by me. To me “more weight” would be because it is “more likely.”
This paragraph is from the article linked to the Occam’s Razor link:
Its scientific application is to select priority between developing theories of equal predictive power. The "simpler" theory with fewer (or less onerous) assumptions is probably the most appropriate one. For example, if you see hoof-prints on your local walking trail, think horses, not Invisible Pink Unicorns.
I'm an artist and coming upon hoof prints might well trigger my imagination to make visible your 'pink unicorns'
What you've added dovetails back to bias in my view. I maintain that, for all intents & purposes, it's impossible to remain bias-free.
> To wit:
'Common sense is nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down by the mind before you reach eighteen' - attributed to A. Einstein Charles: That's a wrap: I'll not continue this particular subject any longer on this thread. Nevertheless, it's an extremely important issue here in my view; in fact it could be argued that it is the main cause of the rancor & differences between the two camps.
