Tweet
Why I love the Ripper murders.
Occam’s Razor paraphrased reads ‘that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected.’
This premise can at least be applied to, if not answer, almost every historical conundrum we face, E.g. In the Kennedy assassination, whether true or not, the single gunman theory requires far less assumptions than any of the conspiracy theories.
There is no doubt that Begg, Fido, and Sugden have fought an uphill battle trying to apply this theory (if not in name, but in practice), to debunking one convoluted conspiracy theory, or cherry-picked hypothesis, after another.
So why not apply Occam’s Razor to the Double Event and see what it gets us.
We can conclude that in the midst of heightened security: expanded police patrols; cops dressed as unfortunates; anxious prostitutes first walking their prospects by local Bobbies; citizen gangs roaming the streets bent on revenge; and a populace whose unwritten rule is that no man should walk the streets alone lest he be attacked by a mob, the killer succeeds in attacking two separate victims, fifty minutes and a quarter mile apart.
Or, we can conclude that amidst this heightened security, two separate killers, 50 minutes and a quarter mile apart, attack two prostitutes by pure coincidence.
So which is it, a single killer with unbelievable stealth, or an unbelievable coincidence? In which argument do we make the fewest assumptions?
That’s what I love about studying the Ripper murders; even Occam’s razor offers us no solace.
Occam’s Razor paraphrased reads ‘that among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected.’
This premise can at least be applied to, if not answer, almost every historical conundrum we face, E.g. In the Kennedy assassination, whether true or not, the single gunman theory requires far less assumptions than any of the conspiracy theories.
There is no doubt that Begg, Fido, and Sugden have fought an uphill battle trying to apply this theory (if not in name, but in practice), to debunking one convoluted conspiracy theory, or cherry-picked hypothesis, after another.
So why not apply Occam’s Razor to the Double Event and see what it gets us.
We can conclude that in the midst of heightened security: expanded police patrols; cops dressed as unfortunates; anxious prostitutes first walking their prospects by local Bobbies; citizen gangs roaming the streets bent on revenge; and a populace whose unwritten rule is that no man should walk the streets alone lest he be attacked by a mob, the killer succeeds in attacking two separate victims, fifty minutes and a quarter mile apart.
Or, we can conclude that amidst this heightened security, two separate killers, 50 minutes and a quarter mile apart, attack two prostitutes by pure coincidence.
So which is it, a single killer with unbelievable stealth, or an unbelievable coincidence? In which argument do we make the fewest assumptions?
That’s what I love about studying the Ripper murders; even Occam’s razor offers us no solace.
)
Comment