The unit of survival is a flexible organism-in-its-environment. — Bateson, Form, Substance, and Difference

That is perfectly in keeping with the ‘mind-created world’. Bateson is one of the sources of ‘enactivism’ and a major influence in The Embodied Mind, which comprehensively deconstructed ‘the view from nowhere’.

I recognize that influence. I submit that it is incompatible with the Gerson view of Platonism.

You seem to want to have both at the same time.

I submit that it is incompatible with the Gerson view of Platonism. — Paine

Sure, but that is not a topic of debate in this thread.

So, I should not connect all the things you have said as the continuity of your thought?

I suffer from institutional memory.

They’re different topics, but there is a way of connecting them, subject of a forthcoming OP.

If you say, the world is created by your mind, I feel your world is likely to be very much in illusion. A perceived world sounds more accurate. — Corvus

Just out of curiosity, what is the difference between a person's created world and a person's perceived world?

The world perceived by a mind has an external cause that may be of a different nature from the mind (classical dualism).

The mind-created world, as I understand the OP, has no external cause and is a monism where everything that exists has mental properties.

The mind-created world, as I understand the OP, has no external cause and is a monism where everything that exists has mental properties. — JuanZu

Not quite what it says. I don't claim that the mind is constitutive of objects in the way that wood is constitutive of boats or clay of pots. It is an epistemological arrgument.

I acnowledge that the word 'created' might be a poor choice of words in the context. I'm referring more to the role of the mind in constructing or synthesising what we take to be a completely independent and external world.