Simply by saying it like this "true in some narrow technical sense" then "false in probably more relevant senses" so your empirical observation is probably "true" rather than scientific evidence, or facts? (which you call narrow and technical), no it's not probably true and there is a disconnect between your emotional attachments to what's less probable to what's more probable. You don't even see it as a problem because it's your lens, yet you have to do your best to admit it in a way where it doesn't seem too obvious by using words like "narrow". That's exactly what I invite you to discuss further, why are you believing things to be false, when the scientific evidence says otherwise? ("true in some narrow technnical sense") I presume you're also using true and false in a linguistic way, there's no such thing.

There is a narrow technical sense in which my actions are dependent on the gravitational pull of some particular atom in a random star in a distant galaxy. That atom is having a physical effect on me. This is true and indisputable.

In a more relevant sense, that atom is not having any effect on me that I should bother with considering. If a magical genie intervened and screened off the gravitational field of that atom, it would change none of my choices in any way that could be observed.

What am I supposedly believing that is false, that is contradicted by science? What specific scientific findings are you implying that I have got wrong?

...

Let me back way up.

You are saying a lot of really uncontroversial things that nobody here particularly cares to argue about, like "Occam's razor is good" and "we are not causally separate from the universe at large" and "living life as a human requires a constant balancing and negotiation between the emotional/sensing/feeling and rational/deliberative/calculating parts of the human mind". These ideas are all old hat around here. They go all the way back to Eliezer's original essays, and he got those ideas from much older sources.

Then you're jumping forward and making quasi-religious statements about "aligning with reality" and "emotionally submitting" and talking about how your "sense of self disappears". All that stuff is your own unsupported extrapolations. This is the reason you're having trouble communicating here.