Originally Posted by
Mobyseven
If you use the bolded section as a premise, idealism becomes impossible. If a thought requires a thinker and a doubt requires a doubter, then the thinker and the doubter have to precede the thought and the doubt. If the thinker precedes thought, the thinker cannot be composed of thought, and thought cannot be the ur-substance. QED.
Damn, you're good.
To quote Huxley on Darwin, "How stupid never to have thought of that." It certainly puts a new spin on the claim that idealism leaves room for God. Maybe all forms of idealism are dualist to the core?