This is useful and enjoyable but is also disturbing is not being understood or acknowledged by more people. The universe that has emerged from the quantum mechanical model has done what all such paradigmatic transformation do and that is to make everyone extremely nervous for a long time.
That is often not a conscious nervousness but the anxiety from fundamental pieces of our world starting to crumble and become dysfunctional. As a result, people tend to grab hold of whatever they think is important and refuse to acknowledge that things are in motion.
Of course, that is what Kuhn and all that you mentioned have been trying articulate. I can through this over the last forty years from the perspective of intellectual history and technology-driven change. In the end none of that much matters. Electrons are gone as those reassuring tiny balls orbiting a nucleus and promising a future of progress as our most important product. For that matter, General Electric is gone also.
All we have is the wave function, entanglement, and decoherence into different worlds all around us. As you note, the desperate search for ways to retain objects and the limit of local action requires, not a correct answer, but that the damn many worlds just go away.
Endless questioning to the best of our abilities is all that we have. There are people really doing this now and it appears, to me at least, that it is starting to bear amazing fruit.
The question of testability to eliminate things we don't’ want to see is certainly valid as pragmatism. But there are questions that lead to places that can be dismissed just because they’re not immediately testable but simplicity does seem to be a universal virtue, for lack of a better term.
The one question that you didn’t mention is Occam’s razor. That is a cruel weapon to the human narrative desire but the real tool of pragmatism. That is what convinces me of the value of the Everett Many-Worlds model. You only need the wave function and Schrödinger’s formula.