Quantitative Parsimony, Explanatory Power and Dark Matter

Abstract

Baker (Br J Philos Sci 54:245–259, 2003) argues that quantitative parsimony—the principle that hypotheses requiring fewer entities are to be preferred over their empirically equivalent rivals—is a rational methodological criterion because it maximizes explanatory power. Baker lends plausibility to his account by confronting it with the example of postulating of the neutrino in order to resolve a discrepancy in Beta decay experiments. Baker’s account is initially attractive, but I argue that its details are problematic and that it yields undesirable consequences when applied to the case of astrophysical dark matter. Baker has not succeeded in showing why quantitative parsimony is a theoretical virtue.