Proof Mind is Fundamental and Matter Doesn't Exist

[Rational AKD]

LOL, you very much did.  I didn't feel the need to quote, as I was paraphrasing your entire OP.  Perhaps you don't see it that way..that's okay..on this point, there will be no debate or agreement between us.  

I don't see it as a good representation of the OP... so no, I didn't make the connection.

and as an argument for monistic idealism, it fails, while invoking that which it has no need of invoking to begin with.  Perhaps you should try a different route?

I don't see how this incredibly vague criticism is supposed to help me... perhaps you should be specific and maybe add a direction of correction or at least a focus to the criticism?

It doesn't really matter whether or not matter exists, everything you experience (which is everything- insofar as you could ever know it) is mind regardless.

and what's your point?

Who told you that?  I can show you a sim, I can point to mario on a circuit board -all- day long.  Whether you see or percieve it or not, essentially, whether you have the nintendo plugged in or not, so long as the circuit has power..... the sim is running and exists.  The sim -is- those little parts, and is -not- dependent on your individual (or our collective) perception of it. If your model can't incorporate that fact, your model has a problem.

the circuit board is not the sim... it's what runs the sim. the sim is what you perceive on the TV screen, and the parts of the sim that are loaded are the parts that are in your load area. some games have individual maps loaded at one time. others, like skyrim and fallout for example, have one huge map and load things based on proximity and screen reference. sometimes when the loading is slow, you can see details of the map being loaded on your screen. obviously there's not enough 'lag' to see that in the real world.

That's a long winded way to avoid acknowledging that you cannot actually disprove substance dualism...........eh?  I don't, personally, have much patience for it myself, but at least I don't claim it's been disproven as part of my argument for some other thing based upon the first line acceptance of a possibility for sake of argument.......

just because you aren't willing to consider the argument doesn't mean it's an avoidance tactic... as I said, it has been acknowledge by philosophers substance dualism has this problem. if you're going to criticize, at least try to substantiate your criticisms. it saves time by avoiding me the trouble of asking why if you provide that answer first.