> It’s almost like scientists want to ignore Mind, and try to describe the world only in terms of matter
It's not a matter of scientists wanting that, and plenty of scientists have quite overt beliefs about non-material truth.
However, science, in the modern, systematic sense is about a process which is entirely concerned with testable predictive models of the relation of observable material facts. Non-material potential truth that is not materializable in the form of testable material predictions may or may not exist, and may or may not be interesting to a particular scientist, but is outside the domain of science.
> Think about it, if you look at an atom close enough under a powerful microscope, it becomes clear that it’s actually almost 100% open space!
No, it doesn't. The highest-resolution (new-as-in-this-year) electron microscopy techniques are sufficient to see atoms as somewhat more than point objects, but not enough to see that they are mostly empty, That they are mostly empty is part of the model produced by modern physics, and you've probably seen popularization that talked about what you would see if it was possible to see at certain granularity, but that's not the same thing as what you actually can see with the most powerful microscopes that actually exist.
It's not a matter of scientists wanting that, and plenty of scientists have quite overt beliefs about non-material truth.
However, science, in the modern, systematic sense is about a process which is entirely concerned with testable predictive models of the relation of observable material facts. Non-material potential truth that is not materializable in the form of testable material predictions may or may not exist, and may or may not be interesting to a particular scientist, but is outside the domain of science.
> Think about it, if you look at an atom close enough under a powerful microscope, it becomes clear that it’s actually almost 100% open space!
No, it doesn't. The highest-resolution (new-as-in-this-year) electron microscopy techniques are sufficient to see atoms as somewhat more than point objects, but not enough to see that they are mostly empty, That they are mostly empty is part of the model produced by modern physics, and you've probably seen popularization that talked about what you would see if it was possible to see at certain granularity, but that's not the same thing as what you actually can see with the most powerful microscopes that actually exist.