Again, you seem to be convinced that philosophical thinking is empirical. Occam’s razor is a rule of thumb to choose between scientific models. Philosophy involves ontology, science can’t. You can laugh at people who don’t believe what the sages of society say, but a philosopher doesn’t accept things just because authority or consensus say so. And this is why I’m enraged with this book, that does not even bother to explain why conspiracy theories are a waste of time, yet pretends to teach philosophy.

Edit: We can say that X behaves according to a particle or wave model. But a scientist cannot say what X actually is. That is what I mean by ontology. Whether earth best fits a geocentric or heliocentric model is a matter of science. Whether we live in a geocentric or heliocentric universe is a question of ontology.