Proof Mind is Fundamental and Matter Doesn't Exist

[bennyboy]

The difference is that I have direct access to the experience of ideas, and therefore choose idealism as the most sensible default position. 

Ital is mine.  May as well start here.  Why did you make me do that, you knew you'd said it just as well as I did......your "therefore" is a comp fallacy, end of.  Your continued defense of that same comp fallacy by it's constant invocation as both the impetus for your acceptance of idealism and as a criticism of materialism...is inexplicable, and irrational.

Really? We, as humans, have interacted with what % of the universe, according to you? And yet, we have the Big Bang theory, and established rules of physics, and it is your position that ALL OF REALITY is founded on these rules, is it not? You claim it must be turtles, all the way down and in every conceivable direction, do you not? This is because you know of nothing else, and extend what you know into the unknown.

What color pot are you? (hint, it reflects no visible light)

Now, If materialism is not true (or cannot be true), then materialism is not fundamental to all reality.  If materialism is not fundamental to all reality (or cannot be fundamental) - then materialism is not true......because materialism is a position regarding what is fundamental to reality........................are you going to need me to quote you on this as well, btw?   Do you actually think I'm going to let you bullshit me, when I can just scroll a few pages back?  Who the fuck am I talking to?

My view of positions, and of reality, is broader than yours. I think that materialism is a sensible position, but only in a certain context: that of experiences which are both consistent and sharable with other humans. The experience of mind is not sharable, and is not well described by materialism. The world of QM, taken on the basis of individual particles, isn't really consistent, and is therefore not well described as matter-- though for now, you seem to be willing enough to describe mathematical functions as "material" so long as they are roughly positioned in time and space.

So no, I don't demand that all reality be describable by materialism for that position to have value. And that is why I say that idealism subsumes materialism. Of all the ideas we can have, some of them are about experiences which are consistent and sharable.

No, Benny, I'm not confusing anything, and I'm no more beholden now to explain upon what -if anything, wave functions supervene.  No more so than the last time you tried this route.  If I could explain that would not prove you wrong, if I could not it would not prove you right.  You are hoisting a flag of bad logic, right now - all sails...guns run out, why?  The last time you asked a question like this you were supplied with -exactly- the answer you claimed to be looking for...but having been given that answer, you persisted in it's negation.   I think you ask these questions as a way of deflecting with no intention of ever altering your position even if your demands are met.

I sense a disturbance in the force. We are about to move from argument to cat memes, amirite?