IMO, Occam's Razor is only meaningful when there are two competing hypothesis, one of which is markedly simpler than the other. Mentioning it in a context of "s

IMO, Occam's Razor is only meaningful when there are two competing hypothesis, one of which is markedly simpler than the other. Mentioning it in a context of "surely it can't be this complicated" without pointing towards a simpler alternative doesn't strike me as very useful. I know you're not the person who made the original argument, just chiming in on the discussion.