ABSTRACT
Paul Postal argued that a approach to linguistic theory was simpler because it eliminates a class of nontransformational mapping rules. According to Postal's reasoning, the theory which has fewer kinds of rules is more "homogeneous" and hence is to be preferred unless there are strong empirical considerations favoring the Standard Theory alternative. Nature appears as a complex system whose factors are dimly discerned by us. The aim of science is to seek the simplest explanations of complex facts. Science itself, therefore, may be regarded as a minimal problem, consisting of the completest possible presentment of facts with the least possible expenditure of thought. Troubles only arise when, under the spell of bad philosophy of science, linguists suppose that they must adopt best theory criteria other than those which naturally guide their investigations. The particular linguistic case that Postal has in mind fares no better.
