Does our universe require all our explanations to be the most minimal?

For example, entropy indicates that everything in our universe tends to a minimum.

So all explanations should be as minimal as possible? That is, ontological simplicity is the main criterion for choosing the best explanation? Should the best explanation be the most minimal?

Solipsism is the most minimal explanation because it contains only one entity (my mind), so it is ontologically the simplest explanation.

The existence of other minds is a more complicated explanation because it says that there are billions of people and all people have minds. This explanation contains many entities (billions of minds) and is ontologically much more complex.

So, if all our explanations must be the most minimal, then it turns out that solipsism is true?

Is there evidence that the most minimal explanations are true? Is entropy one of the arguments in favor of the most minimal explanations?

  • 1
    Does this answer your question? Limitations to Occam's razor
    – Conifold
    Apr 27 at 20:09
  • Simpler structures, for the most part, occur more frequently in nature than more complex structures. This is what Occam's razor / kolmogrov complexity are trying to generalize from, but at a higher level of abstraction
    – TKoL
    Apr 27 at 20:19
  • 1
    It is metaphysically impossible for evidence to support or contradict solipsism, because if one accepts solipsism, there is no such thing as evidence.
    – g s
    Apr 27 at 20:41
  • 2
    If solipsism is true, why are you asking question of imaginary people? Apr 27 at 20:45
  • It is simpler that each person has their own mind than that one mind controls billions. It is simpler that each atom is affected directly by the atoms around it than that God controls stupendous numbers of atoms.
    – Scott Rowe
    Apr 27 at 21:44

1 Answer 1



to all questions.

(ontology is not about simplification, but realization)

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .