I'm not sure I agree. Things such acausal trade may mean we should know about what we can't affect (nor can affect us). But even then, I was merely talking ab

I'm not sure I agree. Things such acausal trade may mean we should know about what we can't affect (nor can affect us). But even then, I was merely talking about truth for truth's sake, where otherwise worthless knowledge does matter. Nitpick: You didn't even need Occam's Razor: Many World implies that the QM predictions are true. of course the truth of those predictions are more probable than Many Worlds. I, on the other hand, used Occam's Razor to compare Many Worlds and Copenhagen, which are mutually exclusive. I agree agnosticism is good. I'd rather be aware of my own ignorance. I like it better however when I'm also aware of its magnitude. Probability theory does just that. I don't know if Many Worlds is true, nor do I know if Copenhagen is false. But my current state of ignorance is more precise than that.