Changes on Idealism in relation to QM

1. Problems with my own series of QM interpretations
2. Alternative physics-based arguments for Idealism that should be used instead of relying on QM interpretations
3. Epistemic problems for any physics-based arguments for idealism
4. What idealist should really be focusing on when it comes to making the case for idealism

[MonisticIdealism]

I agree with your decision. I think it is wise to distance yourself from physics-based arguments and to instead capitalize on the philosophical high ground. Idealists such as myself and Pessimistic Idealism have been advising fellow idealists to avoid physics-based arguments for years so it's good to see more coming around.

[Harlequin]

I want to say I really like your videos and I appreciate your work in them. Can't wait to see more. I've recently just begun research into this. I find it very fascinating.

[andrewwells]

3:00 "Copenhagen assumes idealism to be true"

erh ... whaaadd???

[themel]

Well then many of your videos would be invalid ... would they not? Anyway, I think you should take a more Philosophical path, because for example, Johanna Raatz sometimes makes mistakes. For example Kastrup does not use many physical arguments, but he gets his philosophical interpretations, I think you should work around there. Courage and Thanks for the message!