Air

But that is prone to delusion due to the fact that such experiences can only occur from within the human experience. It's not epistemologically correct to assume that consciousness is a fundamental feature when you're already a conscious human being, it could be simply all a projection from your current human experience, for example there is no conscious experience for a coffee table. If you're going to claim that inanimate objects are also conscious that again is prone to the human experience bias. Therefore the most epistemologically correct position is agnosticism, similar to Sam's, even though I'm not sure he gets this nuance.

@Leo Gura Why are you laughing? God is not conscious on the most fundamental level, it's empty. Consciousness is second order to Emptiness. Emptiness then becomes aware and that creates the conscious experience. So Sam is actually correct for not buying into idealism because it's not the ultimate truth but just a conceptual construct of truth. And it's on the same level as materialism so there's no hierarchical order of truthfulness between the two.

But maybe it is over imagination on your side. Case in point you're speaking for him as if you can know his level of understanding but maybe all of this is just your imagination and he realises his godhood in different labels.

Sea water is not cleaner than lake water. What is clean water but a DOGMA?

Trying to end dogma is also a dogma.

@Flowerfaeiry I want to mentally masturbate. You have a problem with that?

This would be dismissing the mind in how things appear to be but then using it again in a malignant way. If you don't interject the mind in the equation you can't say anything at all. No direct experience and no anything else. But since you are using the mind to make conclusions at least consider the obvious correlation between subject and object. If everything was either a subject or an object the mind couldn't exist. But there is a mind or a consciousness or a perception that is occurring. This perception is entangled with the unperceived reality and they affect each other. To say that there is no unperceived reality is to say that there is no direct experience in the first place.

Actually Sam appears to have a more correct epistemological position and an open-mind that Rupert. The latter is clearly an idealist, while Harris is taking an agnostic careful position.

It's the other way around for God's sake! Meditation is the only sane thing in a world of absolute insanity.