Did you watch this yet? It’s almost like Iain McGilchrist has studied your writing and created a video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dFs9WO2B8uI

I’ll give a basic response now and address your points after you’ve watched the video.

Take Kant’s noumena — “the thing-in-Itself, “Reality” with a capital R. Kant says we do not know it directly, only our response to it — Heisenberg said the same thing about physics. Let’s call the noumena “X” and put it on a line, at the far left.

Now, take our qualia — our qualitative, conscious sensory experience; specially, let’s take the experience of a red apple. According to neuroscience, the image of a “red apple” is not “out there” — it is not X, it is not ultimate Reality, but it is our brain’s response to the unknown stimulus “X”. This is the phenomenon that Kant said is the reaction to the noumenon. Let’s take our conscious experience of qualia and put it on the line, in the middle.

But doesn ‘t physics tell us that the unknown stimulus, X, to which our brain responds with the image of a red apple, is some kind of light wave? No. “Light wave” is the result of a quantitative, mathematical analysis — not of X, but of the peceptual qualia, “red apple.” So let’s take the quantitative analysis — essentially, a description (not an “explanation,” as nobel prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg reluctantly acknowledged in his 2003 NY Review of Books Essay, “Does Science Explain Everything? Anything”) — and we’ll put it on the far right.

So we have the Reality, the noumena, the X, on the far left, the qualia, our conscious experience, in the middle, and the scientific analysis of our experience — a purely abstract, (according to Whitehead, Planck, Bohr, Bohm, Masi, Zajonc, Wallace, and countless other physicists and mathematicians), quantitative analysis of the behavior of the measurable aspects of our experience, on the far right.

Whatever is on the far right — whether we are referring to the physicists’ concepts of matter, energy, force, gravity, magnetism, waves, particles, etc — is twice removed from X.

McGilchrist explains brilliantly how we have taken abstract concepts, mathematical analyses of experience, and taken them to be X.