A little more on Ockham that may not be known:
*William of Ockham (“Occam” is the Latin spelling) was an English theologian of the fourteenth century who has become relatively obscure today. Others, like Thomas Aquinas and Duns Scotus, are much better remembered and are practically superstars in comparison. Yet, it was actually William whose ideas and writings prefigured modernity.
Ockham was probably born sometime between 1290 and 1300 and he died on April 10th, probably in 1349 due to the fact that the plague was especially strong that year (although some think that he may have died one year later).
There is one thing for which Ockham is well known and remembered — his so-called “razor.” What is his razor? It is a logical tool he used to cut absurdities out of arguments and philosophical systems. According to Ockham, the simpler an explanation is, the more preferable it ultimately is. In other words, if it is not necessary to introduce certain complexities or hypotheticals into a situation or explanation, then don’t do it. Just say No. Not only would the result be less elegant and convincing, but it would also likely be less correct.
Nowhere does Ockham assert that the simpler explanation is always more correct or that the more complex explanation is always less correct. Had he done so, he would have been mistaken and remembered quite differently. The point is to start from the simplest possible explanation and only make it more complex when absolutely necessary.
An example of this which is relevant to atheism is the following two hypotheses:
There is a universe.
There is a universe and a God which created the universe.
The first hypothesis is obviously simpler than the second. Thus, without sufficient reason, the first is preferable to the second. That doesn’t mean that the second hypothesis is wrong — it does, however, mean that we should not simply assume the second. Interestingly enough, this theologian himself recognized that his logical tool essentially eliminated the hypothetical of the existence of God in pretty much all arguments and explanations. You might think that this would be a problem for Ockham, but that judgment would be a bit hasty.
click ref.
So really it's not relevant wether Ockham believed in god or not what is relevant however is that he realized theres's no logical way to explain god existence or not, unless he introduced all the extra complexities which are unnecessary and which he deliberately sought to eliminate.
Godless
