Philosophical differences tend to imply functional differences.
Originally Posted by Singu
Everyone in science has been doing this for centuries. Stop pointing it out like it's something special.
That's why he had "thought experiments" to attempt to come up with explanations for certain phenomenas and resolve apparent contradictions in known theories and science at the time.
Bohr never championed multiverse theories. He's notable for the 'Copenhagen Interpretation'—effectively an instrumentalist take on quantum phenomena that tries to avoid getting mired in metaphysical assumptions beyond what can be measurably observed.
While Niels Bohr attempted to "bypass" having to explain things by coming up with the probabilistic "interpretation" of quantum mechanics. You don't need to deal with the "Many-Worlds theory" explanatory nonsense, because you can't see or feel any multiverses, anyway.
Probabilistic interpretations aren't a way of 'bypassing' explanations. For all anyone knows, probability may well represent how reality actually works. As Max Born says:
"The question of whether the waves are something 'real' or a function to describe and predict phenomena in a convenient way is a matter of taste. I personally like to regard a probability wave, even in 3N-dimensional space, as a real thing, certainly as more than a tool for mathematical calculations… quite generally, how could we rely on probability predictions if by this notion we do not refer to something real and objective?"