Occam's Razor and Memory Implantation

There is a well-known question: Who said we weren't all created yesterday, and all our experiences and memories were implanted in our brains?
I've never been able to understand why it's better to say that we actually lived this life rather than that the memories were implanted in our brains.
After all, both theories explain all the data to the same extent! And there is even an argument in favor of the other side, since the possibility that all memories are real is one and only possibility, and on the other hand there are infinite other possibilities: 1. That all memories from birth to yesterday were implanted in us. (And we really only live from yesterday) 2. That all memories from birth to a week ago were implanted in us. (And we really only live from a week ago) 3. That all memories from birth and over a year ago were implanted in us. (And we really only live from a year ago) and so on, 1 against infinity, who takes? Infinity!
And even if you manage to explain that the theory is simpler and Occam's razor comes into play here, what is the logic of Occam's razor itself? Who said that it faithfully describes reality? After all, it is possible that memories were really implanted in our brains. Only statistics that show that it is more likely that the thoughts were not implanted than that they were implanted (for example, that 90% of the implantation of memories leave traces, and here none remain) – can decide this question!
Otherwise, it's like arriving on a remote planet, seeing some statue that could have been built by a single being, and deciding that it was really built by a single being in order to "not add entities unnecessarily." Who said it was built by one person? Maybe on this planet the custom is to build a statue by 10 people together? How can one decide on objective reality with such a strange tool?

Will the rabbi be able to get us out of this dilemma?