If a young adult male (volunteer) is placed in a large hole with a wide floor and smooth, high walls, wearing no clothing and with no access to shelter, warmth, shade, air conditioning, medicine, food or water, and the stage is set to test the hypothesis that through an act of will, all the material objects and conditions he needs to exist can be ‘willed’ into existence simply through the motivation of requirement. In other words, his motivation to survive will be so strong, and his mind so focused, that his will power alone will be able to ‘materialise’ objects and conditions into existence simply by desiring’ their presence in the immediate vicinity. Furthermore, the hypothesis that he can change his physical circumstances by will power alone can also be tested, as he tries ‘lift’ his body out of the deep hole and into a better set of circumstances more conducive for his survival. Therefore, we have two broad objectives: 1) using the mind to obtain the lacking resources to survive whilst in the hole, and 2) using the mind to extricate the man out of the hole altogether. Either way, the mind is used to manipulate the material world beyond the usual agency of labour, or hard work. The young man cannot physically ‘work’ to make any of the things he needs to survive simply because there are no natural resources in the hole, and no means of production (i.e. no tools even if there were). The mind in this instance must somehow affect matter without the agency of the body coming into contact with raw materials. As there are no raw materials present in the hole, the mind must ‘project’ its will power over long distances and manipulate and transport what is required to the hole. Alternatively, the mind could try and ‘levitate’ the young man’s body so that it could ‘float’ up and out of the hole – thus changing his circumstances dramatically (and altering science in the process). Some of you may protest as state this entire experiment in inhumane, but I would counter this assertion by reminding you that if mind can affect matter at a distance – then there is nothing inhumane about this experiment at all. In fact, it would be a dramatic show piece full of drama and intrigue, which would prove material science wrong, and the idealist thinking correct. As idealists think the physical world is an ‘illusion’, then all the inherent human rights issues in the parameters of this experiment do not really exist, and the young man is never really in any danger. He will simply ‘think’ his way out of the problem. The reality is that this young man would die of thirst after three days, or possibly exposure. If it rained and he acquired small supplies of water (perhaps in puddles) he might survive a little longer. His mind-set would deteriorate and he would become ever desperate and incoherent. He might drink his own urine and eat his own faeces as it became ever more apparent his will power could not change material reality. As hunger and dehydration set in, his body would start to ‘ingest’ itself, as his inner organs would start to shut-down. As his confusion and frustration grew, he might even try to take his own life in various ways. Of course, if it snowed he could freeze to death, if it rained too much he could drown before the water level lifted him out of the hole. It would be an interesting challenge to those who believe that idealism is a higher form of science to ‘volunteer’ for this experiment. As matters stand, and irrespective of the state of our inner minds, the reality is that the world of matter is only changed for humans through labour, or hard physical work, whereby the human body acts as the agency through which the mind communicates with the world. Idealists have to prove this wrong and they have not, as yet, despite thousands of very expensive self-help programme deceitfully suggesting otherwise.