What is the strongest argument against Bernardo's monistic idealism and/or non-duality?

[SanteriSatama]

The image is brilliant. There's even a true and a false shadow in it.

Brilliantly dark layering! Various grades of "true and false", as shadows from the light source in the roof behave almost but not exactly as expected, in various ways.

[Lou Gold]

What are we to make of the one possibly staring at the shadows on the floor? Is a shadow 'false' due to being a function of reflected light?

Or overhead light? There are three paths of light in the image -- window, overhead light and reflected. The 'falsity' lies in seeing it only one way, which would be my generalized challenge to ontology. My admittedly imperfect way is to call the OP, "The Great Mysteriousness" and hold it lightly without grasping it.

[SanteriSatama]

The rubber meets the road

Supreme Whatever

Vermin Supreme's rubber boot meets the sky. The only boot that a certain kind can agree to lick.

[SanteriSatama]

An "idea-manifesting Mind" is a myth ...

What an curious notion, a myth that pops out of a myth, absent a Mind. We seem to have been reading different books

"Instinctively creative Will" is closer to sentience than sapience. Idea-manifesting mind of Ideal Ism associates more closely with meta-cognitive sapience.

Creative force comes from balls and ovaries. Mind, when not absent minded, can shape the force, but not force it.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Creative force comes from balls and ovaries.

If my dreams are any indication, I have very imaginative balls

[Astra052]

Ultimately I think the biggest clash of ontologies is between physicalism and idealism.

The question was about strongest arguments against BK's approach. Physicalism fails at the starting line. Physicalist supervenience of mathematics - circularity of explaining mathematical cognition with math, leads in current form to Badiou's set theoretical ontology. Which anybody sane could not accept as materialism, and would consider a form of idealism. Badiou himself claims to be materialist, but he's that in the Marxist sense of dialectical materialism, not in the metaphysical/ontological sense of scientism. There's no obvious conflict between dialectical materialism and platonic idealism.

I mean this is kind of the point I was trying to make. I don't think there are really too many holes in BK's individual approach to idealism and the ones you could find are probably minor/up to personal taste. I think Kastrup's approach is probably the strongest idealist approach there is, especially if it is synthesized with Hoffman's approach. If you believe physicalism is wrong then I think Kastrup's idealism is pretty much the only ontology that makes sense and there really aren't any "strong" arguments against it. We know dualism is false, and really I don't think there are many other idealists who would look at Kastrup's views and go "no, this guy has it all wrong".

[SanteriSatama]

Creative force comes from balls and ovaries.

If my dreams are any indication, I have very imaginative balls

So, how's the ole anima-animus integration coming along with you? You said something about the missus being more of hardline materialist STEM character, vs softy idealist you.

[Soul_of_Shu]

You said something about the missus being more of hardline materialist STEM character, vs softy idealist you.

Nah ... missus just unquestioningly and softly accepts the word of the high priests of a deprived paradigm, and prefers I don't spook her out with doubts concerning the 'substance' of reality ...

[Lou Gold]

An "idea-manifesting Mind" is a myth ...

What an curious notion, a myth that pops out of a myth, absent a Mind. We seem to have been reading different books

"Instinctively creative Will" is closer to sentience than sapience. Idea-manifesting mind of Ideal Ism associates more closely with meta-cognitive sapience.

Creative force comes from balls and ovaries. Mind, when not absent minded, can shape the force, but not force it.

Intuition works for me as you say. I feel and words just flow forth. When I was young, this was mistaken for smarts. Now that I'm old, it's mistaken for wisdom. But it never feels that way. The words just arrive. Symbols of consciousness, I guess.

[SanteriSatama]

Nah ... missus just unquestioningly and softly accepts the word of the high priests of a deprived paradigm, and prefers I don't spook her out with doubts concerning the 'substance' of reality ...

Aren't also nearly all STEMs authoritarian followers like that? Who da high priests?