What discussion? You're relying on nonscientific reasoning to reach conclusions. There is nothing to discuss except the flaws in your reasoning. Your personal prejudices and views, intuition as Frederik has said, is what you rely on here. That's just not useful in this context.
What prejudice? Please site the post that exposes my prejudices, as i claim I have no answers to philosophical questions. You never even made a statement so far, apart for the cryptic incoherent "That's absurd" reply to my post:
Any formalism that makes stunningly correct predictions about the world out there must be describing the world out there. Proposing otherwise is probably not even logically consistent.
And yes, it is a discussion even if you don't understand what is being discussed. The argument that QM doesn't describe reality isn't a new one, though i have not seen it being discussed here.
Further, what "nonscientific reasoning to reach conclusions" am i using? I claim that you don't understand at least 90% of what is being discussed here, so what's the point of your participation? Do you even understand that science is silent as to what happens to quantum systems between measurements? What science exactly do you have in mind? That of your fantasy or that of your personal philosophy?
Your personal prejudices and views, intuition as Frederik has said, is what you rely on here.
Fredrik DOESN'T KNOW how reality could be, if QM isn't a true description of it. But he is hopeful that it will be understood(one day). Do you understand as much?