That seems to be part of it. However, I don't think disliking parsimony is that radical. Andrew Gelman is not a fan of parsimony. http://andrewgelman.com/2004

That seems to be part of it. However, I don't think disliking parsimony is that radical. Andrew Gelman is not a fan of parsimony. http://andrewgelman.com/2004/12/10/against_parsimo/ http://andrewgelman.com/2004/12/10/against_parsimo/ My current view is that parsimony is a heuristic you can use, but weak evidence at best. Plus, parsimony is not unambiguously defined, so comparing hypotheses in terms of it can still be subjective even with objective criteria as there is no agreement on which approach is best. It's most justified to say that extremely complex models are unlikely if the complexity is not necessary.