RAZD writes:
I'm glad you saw the need to correct your first diagram. What are you going to do to correct this one?
It can't be corrected. Anything that is referenced is not unreferencable.
RAZD writes:
Your redefinition of reality as {perception of reality}
If you perceive reality to be independent of perception, is that not a perception of reality?
RAZD writes:
is a strawman argument
It's a separate argument, not a strawman.
RAZD writes:
that collapses into a tautology - what is in my mind is in my mind.
If each, "my mind," is referencing a different layer, such is not a tautology.
RAZD writes:
There are things you have never seen, never heard of, that do not depend on your "mind"
Those do depend on my mind -- both to define the sets and to place concepts within them. Here's an example of the latter:
"I have seen everything."
I just emptied the set of, "Things I have never seen."
Now I'm back to normal, with it filled with placeholders.
RAZD writes:
There are experiences of other people that you do not share
So I fill them with placeholders. And if I can fill them with placeholders, where do they exist?
RAZD writes:
How do you rescue your perception problem from being a rather meaningless expression of solipsism?
Who says it needs to be rescued?