Occam's razor states that shorter explanations (formally speaking, hypotheses) are more likely to be correct. Indeed this can be formalized: for a hypothesis class $\mathcal H$ one may ascribe representations to each hypothesis and take their literal length as strings. The shorter ones are more correct. But the problem is I can just rearrange the language to make perverse hypotheses shorter, at which point they will be more likely. This seems contradictory. What gives?
In the learning theory version of Occam's razor, why can't I just declare whatever hypothesis I want to be shortest?
learning theory;philosophy