Lets say that someone (I see it happens quite often) is asking "How photon can go thru 2 slits at the same time?" or "How electron can be a particle and wave at the same time?" What is a right way to answer such questions? It is correct to give answers based on the Copenhagen? Or may be we should tell about other interpretations? Copanhagen: PRO: historically the first interpretation. PRO: may the the simplest? (this is controversual) PRO: It is so complicated that after an information about multiple interpreations people can get absolutely lost. CON: people can be stuck with the very first interpretation thet are given CON: due to non-local nature of WF collapse people tend to ask more and more questions about ETL etc - so may be Copenhagen is the simplest one but not the best one? (this is controversual) CON: Do we have a right to hide a truth, a right of not giving a choice to chose 'their' interpretation? What do you think?