An intro to my non-materialist view

[The Grand Nudger]

I’m going to try and condense a little, so we’ll see how it goes.  

So we have a material world, processes in that material world (the sense process), and somehow the result of that is This Experience.  
Let’s take an example of “someone seeing a computer keyboard.”  Let’s call him “the experiencer.”  He’s just a regular guy who knows nothing about what we’re doing here.  There is a material keyboard some objective distance from his material brain, light goes from the material keyboard to his material eyes, and in that material brain, somehow, he has the experience he would call “seeing that beige keyboard on my brown desk.”  That experience consists of experiences of color and what seems to the experiencer to be a sense of space or distance.  

Some observations.  (I’m sure you’re thinking – yeah, yeah, ho hum, I know all this.  Patiently bear with me.)  

1 This Experience is not the material world – it is an experience happening in a brain that is in a material world.
2 The experiencer can experience nothing outside of his material brain.
3 What the experience thinks is “the world” is not a world, but rather his brain generated experience.  
4 What he experiences cannot be a material world.
5 Nothing in his experience can be “made of atoms.”
6 What he experiences as his body cannot be his material body.

-edited, numbers mine for clarity

See, I knew it would bite us in the ass quick.  These aren't observations, they are propositions.  Assertions about his experience. Just as your framing of the question excluded representationalism by fiat, your propositions seek to exclude representationalism by fiat.  2,3,4,5 and 6 all run afoul of this.

The experiencer can experience nothing in the material world.  For any "object" he sees in his experience to exist in the material world it would have to be made of atoms.  Since his experience must happen in his material brain, any experience-object “made of atoms” would also have to be in his brain.  If the beige keyboard he experienced seeing was “made of atoms,” he would literally have a material keyboard made of atoms in his material brain.  (However, in his experience he might have experiences and “do experiments” from which he could deduce the concept of atoms (a very, VERY important point which we will revisit).

Can't he, though, if he's capable of creating an accurate mental representation of that world?  Sure, any object he sees in the material world must be made up of atoms...ish (there are other dependencies as well, it must be structured such that his human eyes can see it, for example)...but that doesn't mean that the object of the representation actually has to be in your brain.  That would be a nightmare, how would we fit football stadiums inside our heads?  Why wopuld he literally have a beige keyboard made of atoms inside his head..just so he can see a beige keyboard?  That isn;t how sight works, that isn;t how our minds work..that;s not even how reality works..regardless of what beige keyboards and minds are made of........? To hell with keyboards...I could see a werewolf and that wouldn;t mean that there was a werewolf in front of me made of atoms -or- a werewolf doing backflips inside my skull..or whatever the hell it would be doing in front of me.

That, is full on batshit crazy.

Since what he experiences as “his body” is also part of “This Experience,” it also cannot be made of atoms, or else he’d have a body made of atoms in his material brain.

More of the same. 

Since This Experience for him is not a material world, there can be no light going into what he experiences as his eyes.  

-and more of the same. 

My opinion. These are non sequiturs built out of unsound propositions............all of which exclude a single position that answers every one of them...and -that- position is, itself, only one of many that directly contradict these propositions. Assuming that there were a non-material reality...this would be an exceedingly poor attempt to demonstrate that.