If you say that there is nothing beyond experience then the incredibly detailed structures by which the coherences and consistencies of experiences are revealed also belong to experience, but since these are infinitely remote from anyone's immediate experience this means that all of such are perspectivised fragments of a larger but unknown experience, something like a world-mind or mind of God. This is like saying that everything is information and that even the engines on which the computations that make such a statement possible are running are themselves entirely composed of information. In this way you end up saying that everything is made of mathematics, but this in turn is just a way of pushing the veritable Subject as far out of any possible picture as you can, which in turn only asserts it all the more fully. As against this it seems more parsimonious to anchor all of this reality in some sort of matter which is not mind. It is like an analogue computation, in which the experiential possibilities of what-is are only a selection from an infinite set of alternatives, and are chosen only because they happen to be what you are looking for. But if you go to a fine enough grain you can collapse any analogue system into a digital one, so you can't escape the conclusion that all is mind. Defenders of matter have an ideological and ethical commitment to the integrity of science, but from the mind-only point of view this becomes a particular and freely engaged 'meditation' of mind-at-large in which human minds play a role both central and ancillary.