“The true use of art is, first, to cultivate the artist’s own spiritual nature.” – George Inness

I want to touch people with my art. I want them to say 'he feels deeply, he feels tenderly.'Vincent Van Gogh

In all reality , Spirituality is Self-Actualizing,liberation from Self are all in One, One begets the other, the more one grows,the other equally grows, and so the road becomes more guided,clearer, - it is One's own/ no religion can be attached to it,no title etc.

One might call it the process of Un-locking the door and entering the World where Truth Prevails

'In every human being there is the artist, and whatever his activity, he has an equal chance with any to express the result of his growth and his contact with life. ... all change that is real is due to the Brotherhood.” ― Robert Henri, The Art Spirit:

Know what the old masters did. Know how they composed their pictures, but do not fall into the conventions they established. These conventions were right for them, and they are wonderful. They made their language. You make yours. All the past can help you.-Robert Henri

                    There are mighty few people who think what they think they think.-Robert Henri


How can a great number of Human beings do this?

" Transcend beyond Ego,
           thus Transcend to our highest level of Pure Consciousness;  
                                                thus ; transcending to the Highest Level of Spirituality"  ?

Let's assume most can if wish, desire to try;

What must we over-come as far as Ego?

              Here from this website " I will paste a few excerpts;

An Enlightened Awareness in Consciousness

Transcending the ego is a number one priority for a person to attain the ultimate goal.

The Buddha’s words in The Dhammapada, teach the same concept about transcending the ego—taught by attaining “Nirvana” which is the state of Pure Consciousness. Very few humans have attained this state of Pure Consciousness. Within the Hebrew Scriptures, the context of the ego is taught, although it is taught in the way of humility through stories, an example such as King Saul, ego driven arrogance comparing with King David’s of humility and a circumcised heart.

The ego plays three themes in life. The “Me” number one, the feeling “special” concept. Control and power, the ego thrives on having control and power over others. The Victim, the ego loves to play the victim, drawing attention to the victimization of the person that draws attention to the person. The ego is related with pure self-centeredness, which drives a person’s selfishness, greed, and arrogance. Considering that the ego is the source of darkness, for a person to advance spiritually and attain a deep meaningful friendship with the Almighty Divine Source; that person has to use action to humble oneself and understand about transcending the ego.

The person that identifies themselves with the body is living the delusion of the ego. The ego survives within the delusion that the individual is the doer of their own action, the person is the body, and takes credit. Thus, when the body dies, the person must die, which is the common belief, except for members of religion because the ego has them deluded to the point that they’re special and they are saved. Every religion thrives on being the “special group” and they’re saved because of their belief, which is false. Consequently, the person can justify their life through their religion, because they believe they are saved. As a result, justification is an ego driven characteristic that allows the ego to enjoy its survival, along with living a selfish and greedy lifestyle because of feeling special. The comment, “everyone makes mistakes, you will be forgiven” is ego driven thinking. Karmic bonds will be attached.

   If the statement above "Every religion thrives on being the “special group” and they’re saved because of their belief, which is false."

           is true , the question is then "how to nicely,safely convince one it is"

                                                                                                                                 And what are the "Alternatives"

  For myself , my religion is simply    Nature is God, God is Nature,,was easy for myself to understand this some how, though ,

  that just me.

Another excerpt; 

          "The problem with people that teach publicly is that the ego attaches onto the person who is receiving public attention. The ego is crafty to the point of deluding the person that is in the public eye; that they themselves have transcended the ego and others have not. It is impossible to transcend the ego being in the public eye. The ego will take advantage of any open door of opportunity for attention: feeling special, being number one within a group, having people follow yourself, having control over others, playing the victim."

            Action required for Transcending the Ego;

             "The people that teach enlightenment have had a lot of influence within the subject of Transcending the Ego. The concepts of the ego are easy to teach once comprehended. The problem is that many teachers have fashioned a dogmatic position. If the guru declares a person is enlightened then that person is convinced that they attained enlightenment. Enlightenment is related to a higher level of consciousness not an emotional episode. The ego is trampling all over these public teachers because they declare in public that they are a special person; the crafty ego gets just what it wants attention. Consequently, the ultimate goal is out of reach because of the sly behaviors of the ego. The public eye totally opposes transcending the ego. The teacher sets himself up by being special because people are looking up to him and idolizing him. Thus, very few spiritual teaches that receives attention on a public level can transcend the ego properly."

                 Jesus, Buddha, and Krishna were living in the state of Pure Consciousness; that state of consciousness is ego-less. Moses was at very high level of consciousness and he still brought attention to himself – the ego trapped him – at the rock that they got water from. This is a lesson of the ego referring to Moses and the rock, Numbers 20:1-13, keep in mind that the context is doer-ship – Moses took credit and spoke with the tongue – “look what I did”. There is not a word in biblical Hebrew that could be translated into ego; the closest would be the word they translate into “sin”. Since the ego is the source of darkness, therefore – the source of sin. The new earth will be ego-less which is the same as sinless. Jesus was without sin because he was ego-less. Ego is sin, the authentic source of darkness.

                  Transcending the ego resides within:


Seeking and claiming the power within is the only way to transcend such things as: the ego, the senses, emotion, attachment, results of our action, other peoples perceptions, this world, sense objects.

Continually being in touch with our inner Self (spirit) and understanding this is where our reality is situated – comprehending the formless spirit that resides within is eternal is a way to transcend the ego. This fact of reality boggles the personality of the ego. Realizing that what we do, is not the I-ego, but giving the Glory and doer-ship to the Almighty Divine Creator, the ego loses its power. The source of doer-ship is the Creator that resides within.

Humility – the action of lowering oneself is vital and pivotal to Transcending the Ego. Once a person is able to see a small aspect on how the ego operates, at that time, the person can work at transcending the ego.


        For myself ; I simply had to replace " Almighty Divine Creator,,,with Nature/God, due to fact that mankind,knowingly has manipulated,changed all religions over the years due to their "Ego's"

One if really interest in this topic, I would urge to read;

                                          "EINSTEIN ON SCIENCE & RELIGION"- a on site pdf

excerpt from;  -Above-

                     "The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this".

                      "The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another. 

                      " -How can cosmic religious feeling be communicated from one person to another, if it can give rise to no definite notion of a God and no theology? In my view, it is the most important function of art and science to awaken this feeling and keep it alive in those who are receptive to it.
We thus arrive at a conception of the relation of science to religion very different from the usual one. When one views the matter historically, one is inclined to look upon science and religion as irreconcilable
antagonists, and for a very obvious reason. The man who is thoroughly convinced of the universal operation of the law of causation cannot for a moment entertain the idea of a being who interferes in the course of events - provided, of course, that he takes the hypothesis of causality really seriously. He has no use for the religion of fear and equally little for social or moral religion. A God who rewards and punishes is inconceivable to him for the simple reason that a man's actions are determined by necessity, external and internal, so that in God's eyes he cannot be responsible, any more than an inanimate object is responsible for the motions it undergoes. Science has therefore been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hopes of reward after death."

                       " There are pessimists who hold that such a state of affairs is necessarily inherent in human nature; it is those
who propound such views that are the enemies of true religion, for they imply thereby that religious teachings are utopian ideals and unsuited to afford guidance in human affairs. The study of the social patterns in certain so-called primitive cultures, however, seems to have made it sufficiently evident that such a defeatist view is wholly unwarranted. Whoever is concerned with this problem, a crucial one in the study of religion as such, is advised to read the description of the Pueblo Indians in Ruth Benedict's book, Patterns of Culture. Under the hardest living conditions, this tribe has apparently accomplished the difficult task of delivering its people from the scourge of competitive spirit and of fostering in it a temperate, cooperative conduct of life, free of external pressure and without any curtailment of happiness.
-Albert Einstein

I personally do Know,  What the " Ego" , Loves;

             Power,  thus can manipulate others to have same "point of view",,,good example creation of idea of "Devil/evil"                                                             (I have lived in Nature out-side the presents of Mankind, learning Nature has no Evil)

              Only wishs self to see from "one point of view" - " the Left brain"

              Comfort -  thus lazy,thus no chance of finding  "Know thy-self ",,one is to busy striving for wealth/comfort


               Judging - self and every other, person,place or thing based on worth to "ego self"

               Competitive spirit amongst the "Tribe"-   The ego knows once it has man against man, this causes chaos, by way of ;                                                                          "jealousy"

               My guest is once Humanity moved beyond ,the small Clan,tribe group,pack ,which they lived socially much like the -Wolf,;                                                                                       Alpha male and Alpha female

                  There being other packs - where younger male and females could mate with, join.

                    note; my self being Androgynous/berdache type, it is easy for me to see this "role" ;appearing to prevent jealous feelings                                between competing mating males for limited females. The Androgynous (feminine roled) was available for which                                  to relieving the sexual desire to mate- a alternative accepted by all members of tribe.

   note- "Wolf packs generally consist of a breeding pair and their maturing of&pring that help provision and protect pack young. Because the reproductive tenure in wolves is often short, reproductively mature offspring might replace their parents, resulting in sibling or parent-offspring matings. To determine the extent of incestuous pairings, we measured relatedness based on variability in 20 microsatellite loci of mated pain, parent-offspring pairs, and siblings in two populations of gray wolves. Our 16 sampled mated pairs had values of relatedness not overlapping those of known parent-of&pring or sibling dyads, which is consistent with their being unrelated or distantly related. These results suggest that full siblings or a parent and its off spring rarely mate and that incest avoidance is an important constraint on gray wolf behavioral ecology. Kty words: Caw hipus, gray wolves, inbreeding, incest, microsatellites. [Behav Ecol 8:384-391 (1997)

                 Humans being more evolved, must of been always seeking other tribes/clans for mating as by Natures design,incest is needed to be avoided, yet if no mates out side the tribe could be found, - the Androgyny (fem-male) was available until another female could be found.

              Thus the Ego loves to keep us Busy,multi-tasking,keep us busy seeking something material -like Gold-                                                        " I don't think by intent, it just easier then the Complex task of discovering- true self- which contains the taboo,the                                                           Anicent past, all things that Humanity has ever done!

                                                          Simply our History which is vast, yet being part of Nature as One, One has a realization this                                                                                                                  "Library/ Memory" is there

                                                                  remember we are part of One Body

--------------------------------What the Ego don't Like-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

               To be put; Night,Night as in the bed,sleep through such ways as Drawing in form of meditation, -Any Right brain activity;        

                                                                             where it is put to sleep

                Iain McGilchrist's new book ;  The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western               World., takes a long hard look at the two hemispheres of our brains, and what they do, a must read if ones               desires to fully understand the Human condition.   The Master is the Right ,or only way to Spirituality


               Ego doesn't like Abstract thinking- for example;

                          To see as the Wolf sees-   The wolf see the pack as a Whole, yes individuals,separate parts yet as a Whole
                                                                     Human being at one time did, yet due to more complex brain,developing technologies,                                                                            aqiuring things they could call their "Own", also started to drift away from "the Whole idea"                                                                                      creating more complex individual identities such as Michael has created a nice                                                                         rock for hunting, or Bob there, created a nice thing for putting on our heads,  etc. etc.                                                                                Thus the human individual, created value for themselves, thus the individual ego began                                                                                                     - To Form-
                                                                      The Wolf never has had the ability to create a "Thing" in which to carry,thus separating      
                                                                                                  it's self as a individual with a completely New Value

The Jewish scriptures admirably illustrate the development from the religion of fear to moral religion, a development continued in the New Testament. The religions of all civilized peoples, especially the peoples of the Orient, are primarily moral religions. The development from a religion of fear to moral religion is a great step in peoples' lives. And yet, that primitive religions are based entirely on fear and the religions of civilized peoples purely on morality is a prejudice against which we must be on our guard. The truth is that all religions are a varying blend of both types, with this differentiation: that on the higher levels of social life the religion of morality predominates.

Common to all these types is the anthropomorphic(some type of form,similar to human) character of their conception of God. 

 In general, only individuals of exceptional endowments, and exceptionally high-minded communities, rise to any considerable extent above this level. But there is a third stage of religious experience which belongs to all of them, even though it is rarely found in a pure form: I shall call it cosmic religious feeling. It is very difficult to elucidate this feeling to anyone who is entirely without it, especially as there is no anthropomorphic conception of God corresponding to it.- this would much more my belief/spirituality.

    I simply refer to as all of Nature

The individual feels the futility of human desires and aims and the sublimity and marvelous order which reveal themselves both in nature and in the world of thought. Individual existence impresses him as a sort of prison and he wants to experience the universe as a single significant whole. The beginnings of cosmic religious feeling already appear at an early stage of development, e.g., in many of the Psalms of David and in some of the Prophets. Buddhism, as we have learned especially from the wonderful writings of Schopenhauer, contains a much stronger element of this.

The religious geniuses of all ages have been distinguished by this kind of religious feeling, which knows no dogma and no God conceived in man's image; so that there can be no church whose central teachings are based on it. Hence it is precisely among the heretics of every age that we find men who were filled with this highest kind of religious feeling and were in many cases regarded by their contemporaries as atheists, sometimes also as saints. Looked at in this light, men like Democritus, Francis of Assisi, and Spinoza are closely akin to one another.


characteristics of highly spiritual people

------------------------------------------------Signs of Highly Spiritual peoples------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

♥   You recognize yourself in all beings- "You know that you are ONE with all things, all beings, and all creatures. And because your heart is filled with love and compassion, you don’t feel the need to judge, blame, condemn or criticize anyone.  You recognize yourself in the world around you. You see yourself in those who are good, but also in those who are bad; in those who are kind, but also in those who are cruel, and this humbles you a great deal. 


note-  I think or it makes me think; the reason to share my site here publicly, is from the stand point of not being perfect,yet flawed, yet by -Desire- constantly trying to become Aware, thus correct the Flaws.

        I wrote this ,this morning after reading ; - thought on Socrates's "midwife"

Deep Empathy-
  An example of; 
creating the "Void" of nothing (simply not knowing) and Idea that the "Desire" is equally a part of Spirituality, as creating the Void, in which not to know is fully accepted, yet only by the "Desire to Know", even though one may not Know to the Full extent- "The Essense of Anything", One still created the Desire,thus a Void for Spirituality to enter",..Through Attention(meditation),,and there are many forms of meditation. One first creates "Desire"


  You are comfortable with not-knowing. ;

            You know that life’s plans for you are much grander and more complex than the plans you yourself have for yourself. Because of that, you have given up the need to control how your whole life unfolds, and instead, you have learned to instead, put your trust in life

note- Nature would be my term,instead of life



The things you know, you know them from your soul; your wisdom is your own. It does not come from what others have written or spoken, but rather from deep within yourself.                          “I have been a seeker and I still am. But I stopped asking the books and the stars. I started listening to the teachings of my soul.” ~ Rumi

  Forgive easily

  You purified your soul of attachments;

               Because you now know that trying to cling to the very transitory nature of life is a cause of great suffering, you don’t cling on to anything or anyone. You live in the world, but you are not OF the world. You love people, you love the world around you and all that it holds, but you don’t create attachments.

   You no longer look outside yourself for fulfillment;

           You have reached a point in your life where you no longer base your purpose, meaning or fulfillment on anything external to you. The outside world can no longer fulfill you, and your only true fulfillment now comes from deep within yourself.

   You see yourself as a spiritual being having a human experience;

             You know that the body is only the vehicle transporting the soul in this physical world and that even though you have a physical body, you are not the body. You are the Soul within the body.

     You delight yourself in quietness and solitude;

              You delight yourself in quietness and solitude, and the sound of silence helps you connect with the deep side of you where all life’s wisdom rests, and where all the secrets of the world are hidden.


      Being Cognition Compared to Deficiency Cognition

we need to strive for B-Cognitions


1. Seen as whole, as complete, self-sufficient, as unitary. Either Cosmic Consciousness (Bucks), in which whole cosmos is perceived as single thing with oneself belonging in it; or else the person, object, or portion of the world seen is seen as if it were the whole world, i.e., rest of world is forgotten. Integrative perceiving of unities. Unity of the world or object perceived.



 1. Seen as part, as incomplete, not self-sufficient, as dependent upon other things.



2. Exclusively, fully narrowly attended to; absorption, fascination, focal attention; total attention. Tends to de-differentiate figure and ground. Richness of detail; seen from many sides. Seen with "care," totally, intensely, with complete investment. Totally cathected. Relative importance becomes unimportant; all aspects equally important.



2. Attended to with simultaneous attention to all cause that is relevant. Sharp figure ground differentiation. Seen imbedded in relationships to all else in world,as part of the world. Rubricized; seen from some aspects only; selective attention and selective inattention to some aspects; seen casually, seen only from some point of view.


3. No comparing (in Dorothy Lee's sense). Seen per se, in itself, by itself. Not in competition with anything Else. Sole member of the class (in Hartman's sense).



3. Placing on a continuum or within a series; comparing, judging, evaluating. Seen as a member of a class, as an instance, a sample.


4. Human-irrelevant.



4. Relevant to human concerns; e.g., what good is it, what can it be used for, is it good for or dangerous to people, etc.


5. Made richer by repeated experiencing. More and more perceived. "Intra-object richness."



5. Repeated experiencing impoverishes, reduces richness, makes it less interesting and attractive, takes away its demand-character. Familiarization leads to boredom.


6. Seen as unneeded, as purposeless, as not desired, as unmotivated perceiving. Perceived as if it had no reference to the needs of the perceiver. Can therefore be seen as independent, in its own right.



 6. Motivated perceiving. Object seen as need-gratifier, as useful or not useful.


7. Object-centering. Self-forgetful, ego-transcending, unselfish, disinterested. Therefore, it-centered. Identification and fusion of perceiver and perceived. So absorbed and poured into the experience that self disappears, so that whole experience can be organized around the object itself as a centering point or organizing point. Object uncontaminated and unconfused with self.

Abnegation of the perceiver.



7. Organized around ego as a centering point, which means projection of the ego into the per- ception. Perception not of the object alone but of the object mixed-with-self-of-the-perceiver. 



8. The object is permitted to be itself. Humble, receptive, passive, choiceness, undemanding. Taoistic, noninterference with the object or percept. “Let be” acceptance.



 8. Active shaping, organizing, and selecting by the perceiver. He shifts it, rearranges it. He works at it. This must be more fatiguing than B-cognizing, which probably is fatigue-curing.

Trying, striving, effort. Will, control.



9. Seen as end in itself, self-validating. Self-justifying. Intrinsically interesting for its own sake. Has intrinsic value.



9. A means, an instrument, not having self-contained worth but having only exchange value, or standing for something else, or a ticket to some other place.


10. Outside of time and space. Seen as eternal, universal. "A minute is a day; a day is a minute." Disorientation of perceiver in time and space, not conscious of surroundings. Percept not related to surroundings. Ahistorical.



 10. In time and space. Temporal. Local. Seen in history, and in the physical world.


11. The characteristics of Being are perceived as Values of Being.



11. D-Values are means-values, i.e., usefulness, desirability-undesirability, suitability for a purpose. Evaluations, comparisons, condemnations, approvals, or disapprovals, judgments upon.


12. Absolute (because timeless and spaceless, because detached from the ground, because taken per se, because rest of world and history all forgotten). This is compatible with the perception of process and shifting, alive organizations within the perception-but it is strictly within the perception.



12. Relative to history, to culture, to characterology, to local values, to the interests and needs of man. It is-felt to be passing. Depends on man for its reality; if man were to disappear, it would disappear. Shifting from one syndrome to another as a whole, i.e., it is now a bit in this syndrome, now a bit in that syndrome.



13. Resolution of dichotomies, polarities, conflicts. Inconsistencies seen to exist simultaneously and to be sensible and necessary, i.e., to be seen as a higher unity or integration, or under a superordinate whole


13. Aristotelian logic, i.e. separate things seen as dissected and cut off and quite different from each other, mutually exclusive, often with antagonistic interests.


14. Concretely (and abstractly) perceived. All aspects at once. Therefore ineffable (to ordinary language); describable if at all, by poetry, art, etc., but even this will make sense only to bee who has already had same experience. Essentially aesthetic experience (in Northrop's sense). Nonchoosing preferring or selecting. Seen in its muchness (different from the concrete perception of young children, of primitive adults, or of brain-injured people because it coexists with abstract ability).



 14. Only abstract, categorized diagrammatic, rubricized, schematized. Classifying. Reduction to the abstract."


15. The idiographic object; the concrete, unique instance. Classification impossible (except for abstracted aspects) because sole member of its class.


 D-COGNITION 15. Nomothetic, general, statistical lawfulness.


16. Increase of dynamic isomorphism between inner and outer worlds. As the essential Being of the world is perceived by the person, so also does he concurrently come closer to his own Being; and vice versa.

 D-COGNITION 16. Decreased isomorphism.


17. Object often perceived as sacred, holy, every special." It demands" or Calls for" awe, reverence, piety, wonder.



 17. Object Normal," everyday, ordinary, familiar, nothing special, Familiarized away."


18. World and self often (not always) seen as amusing, playful, comic, funny, absurd, laughable; but also as poignant. Laughter (which is close to tears). Philosophical humor, humors. World, person, child, etc., seen as cute, absurd, charming, lovable. May produce mixed laughing-crying. Fusion of comic-tragic dichotomy.



18. Lesser forms of humor, if seen at all. Serious things quite different from amusing things. Hostile humor, humorlessness. Solemnity.


19. Noninterchangeable. Not replaceable. No one else will do.



19. Interchangeable. Replaceable. Characteristics of Being-Cognition and Deficiency-Cognition of the World'

Quantum mechanics suggests that we perceive at most a tiny sliver of reality. Of course we already knew that! We knew that the visible spectrum is only a small part of the spectrum of electromagnetic radiation. We knew that the universe is much, much larger than our ancestors believed.(do we?-me)  And we already knew that we are made of things that are too small for our eyes to see. So how is it news that we only perceive a tiny sliver of reality?

It’s news because quantum mechanics says that the part of reality that we do not perceive is radically different than the part of the world that we do perceive. The difference is so profound that we still don’t fully understand how to talk about quantum reality. There doesn’t seem to be any direct analogy between quantum reality and the reality we perceive with our senses.

Before I explain the gap between our perceptions and reality, I want to state that I completely disagree with the idea that quantum mechanics forces us to accept an idealist view of reality. Idealism says that the physical universe is made out of our perceptions – in other words, out of spiritual reality.  Several early interpreters of quantum mechanics thought that it supported this idealistic understanding of reality. Why would they have thought this? The reason, quite simply, is that they didn’t know how to cope with the issue of quantum indeterminacy.

Quantum indeterminacy is the unavoidable fact that not all quantities can simultaneously have determinate values.  For example, if an electron has a location, then it simply has no speed – it is neither at rest, nor is it moving slowly, nor is it moving quickly.  There simply is no fact of the matter about its state of motion.  Similarly, if an electron is in a definite state of motion, then it’s not in any particular place – not here, nor there, nor anywhere.

Let’s be completely clear about what we’re saying here.  We are not just saying that if you know the position of the electron, then you don’t know whether or not it’s moving.  We’re saying that if the electron has some position, then it does not have any state of motion.  What could this possibly mean?  Nobody is quite sure.

But the story gets more interesting.  Whenever a conscious observer tries to determine the position of the electron, she will always finds that it does indeed have a position.  Similarly, whenever a conscious observer tries to determine the state of motion of an electron, she will always find that it does indeed have some particular state of motion.  If these facts weren’t true, then we wouldn’t be able to test the predictions of quantum mechanics! So how are we to reconcile the fact that sometimes the electron doesn’t have a position with the fact that, whenever we look, it does have a position?

Some quantum pioneers, such as Heisenberg and Wigner, thought that the act of “looking” caused the electron to take on a definite state of motion, or a definite position.  And then it wasn’t much of a further leap for them to suggest that, before anybody looks, there wasn’t any electron.  If that were the case, then physical reality is brought into existence by our acts of perception.

But the path from quantum indeterminacy to subjective idealism involves several illogical leaps. First of all, why think that before a measurement occurs, no quantities possess values?  While some quantities must lack values, it was proven by Jeff Bub and Rob Clifton that many quantities can possess values even when nobody is looking.

Professor of Philosophy at Princeton University.



Quantum entanglement-Wikipedia

Meaning of entanglement

An entangled system is defined to be one whose quantum state cannot be factored as a product of states of its local constituents; that is to say, they are not individual particles but are an inseparable whole. In entanglement, one constituent cannot be fully described without considering the other(s). Note that the state of a composite system is always expressible as a sum, or superposition, of products of states of local constituents; it is entangled if this sum necessarily has more than one term.

The special property of entanglement can be better observed if we separate the said two particles. Let's put one of them in the White House in Washington and the other in Buckingham Palace (think about this as a thought experiment, not an actual one) . Now, if we measure a particular characteristic of one of these particles (say, for example, spin), get a result, and then measure the other particle using the same criterion (spin along the same axis), we find that the result of the measurement of the second particle will match (in a complementary sense) the result of the measurement of the first particle, in that they will be opposite in their values. 

The above result may or may not be perceived as surprising. A classical system would display the same property, and a hidden variable theory (see below) would certainly be required to do so, based on conservation of angular momentum in classical and quantum mechanics alike. The difference is that a classical system has definite values for all the observables all along, while the quantum system does not. In a sense to be discussed below, the quantum system considered here seems to acquire a probability distribution for the outcome of a measurement of the spin along any axis of the other particle upon measurement of the first particle. This probability distribution is in general different from what it would be without measurement of the first particle. This may certainly be perceived as surprising in the case of spatially separated entangled particles