simplicity

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'.{{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}}

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 parsimony respectively.

{{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.

}}

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.

{{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

}}

}}

The recognition that too much complexity can have a negative effect on business performance was highlighted in research undertaken in 2011 by Simon Collinson of the Warwick Business School and the Simplicity Partnership, which found that managers who are orientated towards finding ways of making business "simpler and more straightforward" can have a beneficial impact on their organisation.{{blockquote|Most organizations contain some amount of complexity that is not performance enhancing, but drains value out of the company. Collinson concluded that this type of 'bad complexity' reduced profitability (EBITDA) by more than 10%.Ashkenas, R., [https://www.dukece.com/insights/for-stronger-leadership-cut-through-complexity/ For stronger leadership cut through complexity], Duke Corporate Education, September 2013, accessed 23 April 2023}}

Collinson identified a role for "simplicity-minded managers", managers who were "predisposed towards simplicity", and identified a set of characteristics related to the role, namely "ruthless prioritisation", the ability to say "no", willingness to iterate, to reduce communication to the essential points of a message and the ability to engage a team. His report, the Global Simplicity Index 2011, was the first ever study to calculate the cost of complexity in the world's largest organisations.{{cite web|last=Carly|first=Chynoweth|title=How to avoid a tangled web|url=http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/Appointments/article575337.ece#prev|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120314020134/http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/public/Appointments/article575337.ece#prev|url-status=dead|archive-date=March 14, 2012|publisher=The Sunday Times}}

The Global Simplicity Index identified that complexity occurs in five key areas of an organisation: people, processes, organisational design, strategy, and products and services.{{cite web|title=More about The Global Simplicity Index |url=http://www.simplicitypartnership.com/what-we-do/how-we-simplify-your-business/diagnosing-your-complexity-problems/more-about-the-global-simplicity-index/ |publisher=Simplicity Partnership |accessdate=13 May 2011 |url-status=dead |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20110425220710/http://www.simplicitypartnership.com/what-we-do/how-we-simplify-your-business/diagnosing-your-complexity-problems/more-about-the-global-simplicity-index/ |archivedate=April 25, 2011 }} As the "global brands report", the research is repeated and published annually.{{rp|3}} The 2022 report incorporates a "brand simplicity score" and an "industry simplicity score".Siegel + Gale, [https://worldssimplestbrands.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/wsb_9th_edition.pdf World’s Simplest Brands: Ninth Edition], published 15 December 2021, accessed 4 May 2023, p. 50

Research by Ioannis Evmoiridis at Tilburg University found that earnings reported by "high simplicity firms" are higher than among other businesses, and that such firms "exhibit[ed] a superior performance during the period 2010 - 2015", whilst requiring lower average capital expenditure and lower leverage.Evmoiridis, I., [http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=141718 Brand Simplicity, Stock Returns, and Firm Characteristics: Master Thesis], published 27 October 2016, accessed 4 May 2023{{rp|18}}

Simplicity is a theme in the Christian religion. According to St. Thomas Aquinas, God is infinitely simple. The Roman Catholic and Anglican religious orders of Franciscans also strive for personal simplicity. Members of the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers) practice the Testimony of Simplicity, which involves simplifying one's life to focus on what is important and disregard or avoid what is least important. Simplicity is tenet of Anabaptistism, and some Anabaptist groups like the Bruderhof, make an effort to live simply.{{Cite news|url=http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/life-among-the-bruderhof/|title=Life Among The Bruderhof|work=The American Conservative|access-date=2017-12-07|language=en-us}}{{Cite web|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/mediapacks/inside-the-bruderhof|title=BBC - Inside The Bruderhof - Media Centre|website=www.bbc.co.uk|access-date=2019-10-26}}

{{Main|Simple living}}

In the context of human lifestyle, simplicity can denote freedom from excessive material consumption and psychological distractions.

"Receive with simplicity everything that happens to you." —Rashi (French rabbi, 11th century), citation at the beginning of the film A Serious Man (2009), Coen Brothers

• Ambiguity aversion
• Concision
• Complexity
• Degree of difficulty
• Elegance
• KISS principle
• Minimalism
• Occam's razor
• Simple living
• Simplicity theory
• Simplification (disambiguation)
• Testimony of Simplicity
• Volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity
• Worse is better
• John Maeda – 10 Laws of Simplicity

{{reflist}}

{{More footnotes needed|date=July 2010}}

• Craig, E. Ed. (1998) Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. London, Routledge. simplicity (in Scientific Theory) p. 780–783
• Dancy, J. and Ernest Sosa, Ed.(1999) A Companion to Epistemology. Malden, Massachusetts, Blackwell Publishers Inc. simplicity p. 477–479.
• Dowe, D. L., S. Gardner & G. Oppy (2007), "[https://web.archive.org/web/20081216122608/http://bjps.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/axm033v1 Bayes not Bust! Why Simplicity is no Problem for Bayesians]", [https://web.archive.org/web/20050711025903/http://bjps.oxfordjournals.org/ Br. J. Philos. Sci.], Vol. 58, Dec. 2007, 46pp. [Among other things, this paper compares MML with AIC.]
• Edwards, P., Ed. (1967). The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. New York, The Macmillan Company. simplicity p. 445–448.
• Hickey, Rich (2011) [http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Simple-Made-Easy Simple Made Easy]
• Kim, J. a. E. S., Ed.(2000). A Companion to Metaphysics. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers. simplicity, parsimony p. 461–462.
• Maeda, J., (2006) [https://books.google.com/books?id=lh9gRQ4i_zwC Laws of Simplicity], MIT Press
• Newton-Smith, W. H., Ed. (2001). A Companion to the Philosophy of Science. Malden, Massachusetts, Blackwell Publishers Ltd. simplicity p. 433–441.
• Richmond, Samuel A.(1996) "[https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF00413842 A Simplification of the Theory of Simplicity]", Synthese 107 373–393.
• Sarkar, S. Ed. (2002). The Philosophy of Science—An Encyclopedia. London, Routledge. simplicity
• Schmölders, Claudia (1974). Simplizität, Naivetät, Einfalt – Studien zur ästhetischen Terminologie in Frankreich und in Deutschland, 1674–1771. [http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-100184000 PDF, 37MB] {{in lang|de}}
• Scott, Brian(1996) "[https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF00413770 Technical Notes on a Theory of Simplicity]", Synthese 109 281–289.
• {{cite journal|authorlink=Herbert A. Simon|last1=Simon|first1=Herbert A|year=1962|url=http://ecoplexity.org/files/uploads/Simon.pdf|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090310150418/http://ecoplexity.org/files/uploads/Simon.pdf|title=The Architecture of Complexity|archive-date=2009-03-10|journal=Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society|volume=106|ref={{sfnref | ecoplexity.org | 2009}}|issue=6|pages=467–482}}
• Wilson, R. A. a. K., Frank C., (1999). The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences. Cambridge, Massachusetts, The MIT Press. parsimony and simplicity p. 627–629.
• If Not God, Then What? (2007) by Joshua Fost, p. 93

{{Wikiquote}}

• [http://www.iep.utm.edu/simplici/ Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry]
• [http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/simplicity/ Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy entry]

{{epistemology}}

{{Authority control}}

Category:Abstraction

Category:Simple living

Category:Razors (philosophy)