Basically I liked qutsemnie’s remarks. I don’t make your connection to modifying qutsemnie’s post.
You said you come to a different conclusion than qutsemnie’s remarks but I don’t see how-given what you stated.
I think the brain in the vat bit takes this discussion out of bounds for practical purposes. But that’s me. Please carry on.
the only inevitable conclusion is that we know nothing of physical existence (or lack thereof) and only believe things exist. But, this seems like an impractical statement.
I do not come to the conclusion that the statement is impractical, but rather that the question of physical existence is. We can not know if a god exists, but so what? The brain in a vat/soccer ball example was just to illustrate that.