It’s certainly a shallow, straw man presentation of Deutsch’s arguments. It doesn’t even adequately cover the HTV criterion, let alone an entire book devoted to the subject!

As these surface level descriptions raise questions, I would encourage readers to dig deeper into the philosophy of explanations. Considerations such as the internal and external coherence of the explanations (do they “play nice” with other good explanations?), the logic of causal explanations, the conflation of explanations with predictions, help explain why good explanations are so hard to find.

Thanks for drawing attention to this important subject.