What makes you think that ‘out there’ is objective and permanent, or that it even exists? Because you can see it? Because you can feel it? Because you can hear it? Because other people agree with you? But we know even from science itself that what you see in your visual field (and from every other sense) is just an approximation, or interpretation that’s created in the back of your skull — and does it really shock you that people with similar brains interpret “reality” in similar ways? It seems to me that it only feels real because it’s so self-consistent.
But that’s where things get tricky, because where does the idea of your brain rendering and interpreting reality come from? It comes from a scientific model with the assumption of your brain being ‘out there’ — it’s formulated in the very same box that it’s trying to explain.
Or put another way, how do you know that you’ve got a brain that renders reality and gives you a mental approximation? You know only because that’s what you’ve concluded with your senses — the very things that the same model is telling you are selective and are limited.
So then what’s real? What is the fundamental, empirical base of existence? It seems to me that the idea that consciousness arises from neurons is groundless — consciousness can’t be secondary because it’s the thing that you’re using to experience and describe things in the first place. And so it seems to me that if your sensory subjective experience is all that you can know for sure, then any field of objective study that assumes an external world will always fall short of explaining it.