Now I have to deliberate if I want to be coining a term for a new “razor”. At least not without further refinement/thought.
Occam’s Razor is a gated truth that is routinely misused and misunderstood, but once grasped it is a powerful and elegant heuristic for cutting off from consideration huge swaths of possibility space.
The joking “Macco’s Razor” we just discussed is similar, and in particular the remark that they were mirror opposites was on point in a way I did not even initially realize, because I was focused on “complexity” in a more narrow sense.
Occam’s razor is what we call the realization that it tends to produce more consistently correct logic and understanding to slice away all assumptions for which there is no evidence.
“Macco’s” razor is what we’re currently calling the realization I was expressing that it tends to produce more consistently correct logic and understanding to slice away all assumptions that there cannot be further complexity that we haven't noticed yet.
So maybe I do want to fight for this as a razor. Because you know what? It is absolutely more universally applicable. It is on the level of "we must always try to prove ourselves wrong".
Macco's Razor: when faced with competing hypotheses, pick the one that does not assume you've understood the problem fully.
Though phrased this way, an even more notable thing arises:
Macco's Razor is Occam's Razor, once we realize that the "this is simple"/"this isn't complex" attitude I have in mind is an assumption that there no more complexity.
It's fine to conclude that there is currently no evidence for further complexity. It is not fine to assert that there cannot be.