I think it was Bishop Berkeley who proffered the following argument, taking empiricism to new heights/depths:
Reality can only be said to be present in the mind because reality as we see/hear/feel it is filtered by the senses and interpreted by our minds. However, since we can perceive a thing directly with our mind (say your house), remove it from our sphere of perception, and return knowing it (almost certainly) to still be there, is to say that there is a greater mind (God’s) which supports the existence of things when they are not being observed.
Can this argument be refuted? I would say that most people would not accept it easily, but I find it quite compelling. Is it not also in line with the idea of the “observer principle” in quantuum mechanics (something I know nothing about)?
Another point to support the “reality is mind” argument: when we deduce a law of nature from experiment, where does the law exist? In our minds? In nature? How can the law, which is an abstract principle, exist in a purely physical universe?