I would suggest not using quantum mechanics to support any epistemological, ontological, or other philosophical position.
Referring to probability, randomness, observers, etc in the context of quantum theory all pertain to the models propagated by physicists to explain observed phenomenon in terms of a causal universe. However, because such models assume causality, an inherently unprovable concept, further extrapolations are untenable.
When lay people discuss this topic, it seems that everyone confuses the map with the territory and, because the uncertainty principle describes a map of nothing or a map of one attribute at a time, we arrogantly conclude that there is no territory, or that the territory is violable, or that it is our consciousness, etc.
While some of these conclusions are problematic, at best, they are hardly 'true' in any rational sense of the word.
So to use any part of quantum theory as a premise for a philosophical argument is to build a castle on shifting sands.
Donating my $ .02