I agree ~ it's not a complicated philosophical idea.
In fact, it's precisely what the Buddha teaches in...MN 1: Mulapariyaya Suttahttp://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html
Compare how the putthujana (worldling) sees things...
The Blessed One said: "There is the case, monks, where an uninstructed run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — perceives earth as earth. Perceiving earth as earth, he conceives [things] about earth, he conceives [things] in earth, he conceives [things] coming out of earth, he conceives earth as 'mine,' he delights in earth. Why is that? Because he has not comprehended it, I tell you.
... with how the sekha (learner/trainee) is encouraged to
"A monk who is a trainee — yearning for the unexcelled relief from bondage, his aspirations as yet unfulfilled — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, let him not conceive things about earth, let him not conceive things in earth, let him not conceive things coming out of earth, let him not conceive earth as 'mine,' let him not delight in earth. Why is that? So that he may comprehend it, I tell you.
... with how the arahant does
"A monk who is a Worthy One, devoid of mental fermentations — who has attained completion, finished the task, laid down the burden, attained the true goal, destroyed the fetters of becoming, and is released through right knowledge — directly knows earth as earth. Directly knowing earth as earth, he does not conceive things about earth, does not conceive things in earth, does not conceive things coming out of earth, does not conceive earth as 'mine,' does not delight in earth. Why is that? Because he has comprehended it, I tell you.
As ven. Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli pointed out, "These views [i.e. materialism and idealism] differ from the Right View because as they are focused on developing and providing explanations of the nature of one's experience, while failing to see that fundamentally they are derived from it."
In order words, they are examples of how the putthujana
sees things, because they simply cannot fathom any other way of seeing things...
Ven. Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli wrote:For a puthujjana the world exists. He can perceive things in that world, see them appear and disappear, he can see them changing. A puthujjana can also affect his surroundings and modify things according to own preferences, pursue the desirable experiences and avoid the undesirable ones—the puthujjana is involved. This 'involvement' with things represents the very core of the puthujjana's 'experience as a whole'. Most people spend the majority of their lives obliviously absorbed in it, taking the course of 'involvement' for granted.
Mike wrote:I've yet to see a convincing argument as to why working with a provisional model that what we are sensing is "something out there" is in any way contradictory to the Dhamma as presented in the suttas, or a hindrance to progress in the application of the Dhamma.
If one's goal is merely to adopt the putthujana way of looking at the Dhamma (i.e. mundane right view) and maybe aim at rebirth in higher realms etc. then sure, there may not be a hindrance.
However, if one is seeking nobility, then holding to a materialist view is very much a hindrance, as suttas such as MN 1 and SN 12.15 clearly demonstrate.