I would like to make a group identity that focuses on Occam's Razor as a fundamental rule.
We do not take anything seriously if it has assumptions. Indeed, strictly sticking to facts and narrative elements benefits us more than trying to achieve popularity with the wildest take imaginable. At least then, we are not making massive leaps of logic to justify our conclusions.
We should have certain rules that also reflect this. For example, we should not consider visual parallels to be a strong foundation for a debate.
Basically, we should not assume anything is correct unless evidence demands otherwise. Tread carefully!
We work with facts. If it's not a fact, it doesn't matter.
We do not take anything seriously if it has assumptions. Indeed, strictly sticking to facts and narrative elements benefits us more than trying to achieve popularity with the wildest take imaginable. At least then, we are not making massive leaps of logic to justify our conclusions.
We should have certain rules that also reflect this. For example, we should not consider visual parallels to be a strong foundation for a debate.
Basically, we should not assume anything is correct unless evidence demands otherwise. Tread carefully!
We work with facts. If it's not a fact, it doesn't matter.
Last edited: