Non-existence

[Jon Paul]

No it doesn't, it's a straight forward side-by-side comparison of a virtual scenario compared to a physical one.

And it postulates the existence of something outside of the mind, both in what you call virtual and physical scenarios.

* If that scenario is virtualised it needs, somewhere, something or someone to host it (to run the scenario, to make it work correctly etc. etc.) and that support has to have its own operating system or mind PLUS its own physical support. That's another 2 levels ... even if you assume (as I'm sure you would) that it is unsupported it's still 1 level.

What I am proposing is not a virtual simulated scenario, because there is no simulator and no simulated thing, but simply the experience of the mind and no further positive claims.

No, it doesn't (it doesn't require anyone to drop to questions of ontological anything) ... see above!

Not "to drop questions of ontological anything", no, which is not what I said.

---

But I experience things outside of my mind. My foot isn't in my mind. My senses extend further than my thoughts...

Of course we experience things which seem to be outside of our mind. The question is whether we positively claim that experience to be an experience of an actually ontologically independently existing reality outside of your mind, or whether we reduce it to be an experience confined to your own mind. There is more complexity in the former case, and less complexity and more simplicity in the latter case.