Jeremy Stangroom

Oh for god's sake, Hitchens's daft self-defeating evidence thing has a bloody Wikipedia entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitchens%27s_razor …

Given that it's listed as a razor, a practical rule of thumb not meant to be provable, I don't see a problem with it as a general principle.

Anyway, your version is different: it's a statement about what you'll do - not an epistemological claim (as it seems to be in H's version).

My understanding of a razor was that it's a practical advice on what should generally be done in certain situations.

Right, and if I offered that advice, without evidence, and you were skeptical - what would the advice permit you to do?

Yes, I could dismiss it. My point is that you can show that following the advice has practical benefits, like not getting stuck.

So my dismissing it - as I would be entitled to do (on its own terms) - would have practical benefits?