Growing up, my head was in the stars. I was always looking up, wondering what was out there and when I'd get to experience it for myself. I was the only fifth grader I knew who spent hours plugging numbers into the Drake Equation (probabilistic formula used to estimate the number of advanced civilizations in the Milky Way Galaxy) as I imagined being a part of a first contact scenario. I was spell-bound by Carl Sagan's Cosmos series on PBS. His ability to communicate science was unheard of at the time, and fundamentally changed the way we think about the world around us. Naturally, I read everything he wrote, including what became my favorite novel, Contact.
In the book, the main character, Ellie Arroway offers the concept of Occam's Razor when talking with Palmer Joss about the relationship between science and religion. The idea, often attributed to a 14th century friar William of Ockam, generally asserts that when faced with two competing ideas as a means of explaining the same phenomenon, you should prefer the simpler one. The idea itself is a fairly straight-forward one, and had no doubt been around for much longer. It has been applied widely to many scientific fields, and serves as a logical foundation for many a great thinker.
Almost immediately after picking up that book and beginning to more intentionally wrestle with this tension between science and religion (Sagan's message in the book is arguably that the tension is unwarranted, of course), Occam's Razor has helped to guide much of my thinking. "When you hear hoof beats, think horses, not zebras", after all.
Applying this principle to scientific inquiry seems to be a rather straight forward application, and most would agree. I would argue that it presents a useful lens through which to interpret human behavior more broadly and guide our actions. Certainly, I am not arguing that human beings act consistently rational, as standard economic theory would have us believe. However, applying Occam's Razor to our own reactions to human behavior can prove a useful strategy when attempting to overcome unconscious bias and form meaningful relationships.
We often talk about the difference between intent and impact in diversity work. The idea, of course, is that even if I didn't mean to harm you, you feeling harmed still matters and necessitates and appropriate reaction from me. This distinction often leads to zero sum thinking, unfortunately, and paints the blatant racist with the same brush strokes as the naïve, culturally inexperienced individual. Intent still matters in a world where human interaction is a necessity. It doesn't mean the harm shouldn't be addressed, but it should be addressed in context.
Applying Occam's Razor to these often uncomfortable and harmful situations allows us to consider the simplest explanation for the actions. Is it more likely the person woke up with hate on the agenda or that their limited cultural knowledge and experience (which is increasingly likely as our society becomes more segregated) led them to misspeak. Might this change the way you respond?
Please don't mistake this as an argument for letting something slide simply because they didn't know better. Instead, let the simplest explanation help guide your emotional response. We are capable of learning to be better and we have a responsibility to hold each other accountable once we are taught to be better.
So, next time you're struggling to understand why someone said something or how they could have done something, ask WWWS (What Would William (of Ockam) Say).
"The universe is a pretty big place. If it's just us, seems like an awful waste of space."
- Carl Sagan, Contact
