Since we have explained the difference between existence and non-existence in objective idealism we are now going to refute the most common objections to idealism. These are not all the objections but they are the most common ones herd from materialist and dualist.

Objection 1: Its all woo

Response: Actually no its the new paradigm in physics called “It from bit”. A small number of scientist proponents include, Seth Lloyd, MIT quantum computer scientist, David Deutsch, pioneer in quantum computing, Paola Zizzi, loop quantum gravity theorist, Le Smolin, quantum gravity theorist, Fotini Markopoulou-Kalamara, quantum gravity and quantum information theorist, Anton Zeilinger, inventor of quantum teleportation, John Archibald Wheler, nuclear fission theorist also colleague of Albert Einstein. So are all those scientist woo? I think not and that doesn’t include nearly all the quantum gravity researchers that are studying this stuff that are coming to the conclusion that the world is a simulation, proponents of quantum information theory and the consensus of spacetime emerging from entangled information. Quantum mechanics has since been reduced to quantum information theory which describes the world as a quantum computer (simulation) rather than material objects. So is quantum information theory woo? No its not and there are many scientist that propose it and support it because it works and makes predictions like every other scientific theory. Oh but wait your saying its consciousness causing collapse that’s woo well under objective idealism that would be the Von neumann chain and so “consciousness causing collapse” is a trivial term and really not that important. The Von neumann chain is just standard orthodox quantum theory so its not woo.

Objection 2: Physicalism is everything described by physics and everything that is measurable/observable/testable and predictable is material so everything outside the material does not exist.

Well if you define physicalism to mean everything described by physics then idealist would also be physicalist since all of reality is the same substance so that definition is meaningless. Second you never actually see material things only its perceptions this is because things like qualia and colors are not material they are mental. In fact everything we do is on a mental level only so the things that are truly measurable/observable/testable and predictable are all mental and not material so this turns the entire objection on its head. In reality everything outside the mental (Anything completely mind-independent) does not exist.

Objection 3: Neuroscience has shown the mind is emergent from the brain

Response: No it has not. What neuroscience shows are correlations between mind and brain and not mind emerging from the brain. Saying the mind emerges from the brain because of correlations is the Post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy (Latin: “after this, therefore because of this”) is a logical fallacy that states “Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X.” It is often shortened simply to post hoc fallacy.

Objection 4: Objective idealism is incompatible with theism since God would need to collapse the entire universe for us and if we live in a simulation God would just be a computer programmer and not a true God.

Response: I will divide this objection into 2 parts

(a) God would need to collapse the entire universe since he is in space observing us and observation causes collapse

Well first of all if we live in a simulation then space is an illusion and so God wouldn’t be in space observing us. Second God is not separate from us so he is observing us having an experience of a physical world and apart from our experience there is nothing that needs to be observed since it exist in a state of a wave function. Third we only create the physical appearance of reality and not reality itself. Gods mind is what creates all of reality not our minds.

(b) If we are in a simulation then all God would have to be is a computer programmer.

Actually this is false and i already addressed this response in (Part 7) of this series. Basically for a quantum world like ours with Qubits to be simulated in a mind-independent world (Materialist/Dualist world) all the Qubits in our simulated universe would have to be unpacked into classical bits which requires a computer hard drive larger than what is being simulated which is a computer bigger than the universe itself. So we are being simulated in a computer than our simulators would also be simulated themselves so it would inevitable lead to theism as I explained in more detail (Part 7) of this series.

Objection 5: Objective idealism is incompatible with Christianity

Well no this again is wrong. There is the essence/energy distinction taught in orthodox Christianity which teaches how all is in God, All is dependent on God but that God is greater than the universe.  This is known as weak panetheism and if you would like more detail you can watch this video on the subject. https://youtu.be/_xki03G_TO4

So in conclusion these objections against objective idealism don’t work. We will deal with more objections in future blogs but these are the ones I hear most often from both dualist and materialist and we can see why they don’t work. Next we are going to close this series with some final thoughts in mind.