It is apparently the position that the mind is a result of both what is going on inside the subject and outside the subject.

Wrong Externalism

Maybe some teenage boy sitting alone in his bedroom in Iowa figured out something new half an hour ago; I would have no way to know.

The two examples I gave are well known and well studied theories, held by large numbers of philosophers. Indeed, more philosophers accept Externalism than any other theory of justification. Any essay that argues for a position on the basis of the failure of some alternatives, without considering the most popular alternatives, is going to be unconvincing. If you were a biologist, presenting a new theory of evolution, you would be forgiven for not comparing it to Intelligent Design; however, omitting to compare it to NeoDarwinism would be a totally different issue. All you've done is present two straw man theories, and make pancriticial rationalism look good in comparison.

What did you mean? (by 'ultimately')

That all the criticisms you listed can be reduced to criticisms of inconsistency – generally by appending the phrase ‘and you prefer this not to happen’ to them.