A Brief History
On May 26, 1328, William of Ockham, a Franciscan Friar, snuck out of Avignon fearing his execution would be ordered by the Pope. Known as “Doctor Invincibilis” (Unconquerable Teacher) at the University of Oxford, William had upset the Pope and other high church officials by preaching the Franciscan belief that since Jesus and the Apostles did not own personal property, Catholic clergymen should likewise not possess any worldly goods.
Digging Deeper
Not surprisingly, this situation was contrary to the reality of the day when Popes and Cardinals amassed great wealth. William and other Franciscans sought asylum at the court of the Holy Roman Emperor, Louis IV of Bavaria. There, William conveniently supplied the philosophical and logical thinking outlining the argument that Louis should be the supreme authority over the church and the state of the Holy Roman Empire.
Of course, Pope John XXII did not agree and had William excommunicated from the Catholic Church. William died at age 60 in 1347, and was “rehabilitated” by Pope Innocent VI in 1359.
So why is this guy important? Because his logical and analytical mind has provided philosophers with a fundamental rule of thought, known as “Occam’s Razor.” Although William had written all sorts of philosophical papers, it is the “Occam’s Razor” logic that stands above the rest, something that we in everyday life can apply to our thinking.
The main idea behind Occam’s Razor is applying the doctrine of simplicity to any theory, eliminating all forms of assumption to the minimum possible. Basically, the simplest explanation (without relying on unsupported assumptions) is the best. The idea is to avoid convoluted arguments relying on making up more and more assumptions to support an argument. Kind of a philosophical “KISS” rule (“Keep it simple, Stupid!”) This way of thinking tends toward explanations that are more probable than improbable.
William of Ockham (Occam) did not invent this philosophy, but for whatever reason it is by his name that we have come to know it. This straightforward thinking undermines religious arguments, and for this reason (among others) William earned the ire of the Church. Atheists often use this brand of logic to argue against faith-based thinkers, although William was definitely a man of faith.
Many forms of organized religion have sought to stifle progressive thinking throughout the ages. The works of Copernicus and Galileo are examples of science attacked by theologians, and even today there is great animosity toward the theory of evolution from fundamentalist Christians. Another example of the Bible versus Science concerns the calculated age of the Earth.
Question for students (and subscribers): What do you think about this situation, where religion argues against science? Can science and religion be compatible with each other? Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments section below this article.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Evidence
For more information, please see…
Keele, Rondo. Ockham Explained: From Razor to Rebellion (Ideas Explained). Open Court, 2010.
Ziccardi, M. James. Medieval Philosophy: A Practical Guide to William of Ockham. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2011.
The featured image in this article, a sketch portraying William of Ockham (c1285-?1349), English scholastic philosopher, is in the public domain in its country of origin and other countries and areas where the copyright term is the author’s life plus 100 years or fewer. This work is in the public domain in the United States, because it was published (or registered with the U.S. Copyright Office) before January 1, 1925.
You can also watch a video version of this article on YouTube:
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="2363 http://www.crackedhistory.com/?p=2363">16 Comments
The convocation you cite is also the backstory to Uberto Ecco’s The Name of the Rose.
You seem to have the usual anti-religious bias one see’s so much of today. But consider that William of Occam was himself a cleric, taught at a Catholic university as there was no other kind, and the Church did eventually come around to his position. Faith and reason have been considered indispensable to each other in Catholic teaching for centuries. Indeed were it not for the cathedral schools and the universities founded and led by the church, our whole western scientific tradition could never have emerged.
Finally, the Franciscans are a fine order. They came at a time when movements of radical poverty and anti-chlerical hatred were also a powerful and destructive force. The Papacy had grounds for fear and over-reacted. The existence of the Franciscans today demonstrates that the Church can and did move in positive directions.
The author attended a Franciscan high school.
The church has always sought to silence those who opposed the thoughts and ideas of the religion, it would be a great wonder to see what might’ve happened had they not been silenced.
The church always tried to silence (aka kill) people who oppose their thoughts and how many great revolutions could have happened if people weren’t as scared.
i truly agree with him that back then the church and others like the pope should of not had great wealth. Also how everyone should of not been afraid to speak there mind and be killed by the chruch things might have been differnt today if so.
Interesting how the once-silenced become the silencers when they become the consensus. From Christians in the Roman times to the Middle Ages and even Empirical Scientist being the ones silenced in the Renaissance then doing the same to other forms of dissension as their thoughts becomes the consensus.
I find it ironic that the church is suppose to welcome all and love all equally, but that never seems to be the case. The church always finds away to make those they do not like or those who disagree with them to disappear. Very strange how these people think in my opinion.
It seems like the church is always trying to silence those who oppose their beliefs….In my opinion, the church is supposed to love everybody equally.
the church is supposed to be open to all that come, not just silence those who they don’t agree with
I find Occam’s Razor to be very true. In many cases, I find myself working out these drawn out explanations of why things happened when in reality it was actually something very simple. For example, coming home to garage door open is probably because one of my family members forgot to close it rather than because someone broke in.
Being the bigger man and being accepting should be what the church is about. Instead, they’re basically a “join or die” sort of mentality.
Churches should never be this judgmental to that point.
I agree that the simplest means of explanation is the best.
The video for this article was very helpful and informative.
the simolest means of explanation helped it more understandable for many people
when someone has to sneak away to get a way from possible execution on behalf of his own new belief or opinion that is when you should question yourself and your teachings. should you really be scaring people or trying to understand and tolerate each other