“There is no hope, as far as I can see, of pushing the postulates of economic theory back to a set of irreducible axioms.”

Source: The Role of Measurement in Economics. 1951, p. 12

Source: Hidden Order - How Adaptation Builds Complexity (1995), Ch 3. Echoing Emergence, p. 97

Discrepancies among the Social Sciences (1981)

Source: The Role of Measurement in Economics. 1951, p. 14-15

The Rigveda and the Avesta (2008)

The Doctrine of Necessity Examined (1892)
Context: When I have asked thinking men what reason they had to believe that every fact in the universe is precisely determined by law, the first answer has usually been that the proposition is a "presupposition " or postulate of scientific reasoning. Well, if that is the best that can be said for it, the belief is doomed. Suppose it be " postulated " : that does not make it true, nor so much as afford the slightest rational motive for yielding it any credence. It is as if a man should come to borrow money, and when asked for his security, should reply he "postulated " the loan. To "postulate" a proposition is no more than to hope it is true. There are, indeed, practical emergencies in which we act upon assumptions of certain propositions as true, because if they are not so, it can make no difference how we act. But all such propositions I take to be hypotheses of individual facts. For it is manifest that no universal principle can in its universality be compromised in a special case or can be requisite for the validity of any ordinary inference.

If This Goes On— (p. 432)
Short fiction, The Past Through Tomorrow (1967)

Source: The Rainbow of Mathematics: A History of the Mathematical Sciences (2000), p. 740.

&quot;On the Method of Theoretical Physics&quot; The Herbert Spencer Lecture, delivered at Oxford (10 June 1933); also published in Philosophy of Science, Vol. 1, No. 2 (April 1934), pp. 163-169., p. 165. [thanks to Dr. Techie @ www.wordorigins.org and JSTOR] <br class="br">There is a quote attributed to Einstein that may have arisen as a paraphrase of the above quote, commonly given as “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler,” &quot;Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler&quot;, or “Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.” See this article from the Quote Investigator http://quoteinvestigator.com/2011/05/13/einstein-simple/ for a discussion of where these later variants may have arisen. <br class="br">The original quote is very similar to Occam&#x27;s razor, which advocates that among all hypotheses compatible with all available observations, the simplest hypothesis is the most plausible one. <br class="br">The aphorism &quot;everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler&quot; is normally taken to be a warning against too much simplicity and emphasizes that one cannot simplify things to a point where the hypothesis is no more compatible with all observations. The aphorism does not contradict or extend Occam&#x27;s razor, but rather stresses that both elements of the razor, simplicity and compatibility with the observations, are essential. <br class="br">The earliest known appearance of Einstein&#x27;s razor is an essay by Roger Sessions in the New York Times (8 January 1950) http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30615FE3559137A93CAA9178AD85F448585F9, where Sessions appears to be paraphrasing Einstein: “I also remember a remark of Albert Einstein, which certainly applies to music. He said, in effect, that everything should be as simple as it can be, but not simpler.” <br class="br">Another early appearance, from Time magazine (14 December 1962) http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,872923,00.html: “We try to keep in mind a saying attributed to Einstein—that everything must be made as simple as possible, but not one bit simpler.” <br class="br">1930s