Metaphysical theories such as GSC are not testable in the strictly empirical sense of testability, but they can be tested against logical inconsistencies and their power in answering the crucial existential questions we meet as we live in this universe as a community of subjects. The two crucial questions I have tried to answer are the paradox of death and the paradox of foreign minds, and I think I have succeeded to solve both paradoxes with my theory. The theory is not complete of course, and it contains problematic issues, but I have not had to change the main points for a long time now. It seems to stand on a solid ground. I am very critical and doubt every possible detail I have thought before, but I have not met anything that would cause a revolution or paradigm change in my thinking. Which does not mean of course that there cannot be blind spots in it. Also what you mentioned, the consequences of the theory for the general structure of the objective world, or how the universe can be seen as transparent and logically consistent in the light of the basic insights of the theory, is still to be elaborated, i.e. how empirical scientific facts can be deduced from the theory. Big questions, an ambitious task, and something always remains to be thought over.BigBango wrote: ↑May 15th, 2019, 8:35 pm What you have failed to do is uncover the objective metaphysics that makes your position both understandable in the objective world we share and is also "testable". I do not think your efforts are "science fiction" but that is too bad. At least a position that can be dismissed as "science fiction" is a position that can offer the possibility of testing. Your thinking must at least try to address the objective metaphysics that makes GSC out to be a valid hypothesis.
Another question is if there is any sense at all in thinking these things. A Finnish poet once asked: "Are we here to find out how things are?"