I've tried to explain 2 general ideas without much success that should be easy to grasp.
1 - A final set of all sets, the biggest set, cannot be known due to set size.
2 - Circular arguments are not arguments at all...
I can't justify minds with minds any more then I can't justify water with water independently of what minds do n water doesn't do because of the circularity of the argument.
I thought it was clear enough that minds make choices. Doing choices requires options. Options require bigger sets to chose from. A Final Set cannot be a mind because there is nothing to chose recombine or opt for out of a final set own nature. A final set cannot explain justify or know itself absolutely, it just is, and it is not a mind but rather the reason why there are sub sets which are minds. A final set is the reason of all things motion and options included but itself, being all, it cannot move outwards, it cannot outgrow its own nature. That's what final means. Perfect knowledge would require a perfect replication of said final set complexity, all the information needed be accounted for...if it was possible then the final set would no longer be a final set n thus the reason of everything. In resume a final set cannot be justified (replicated), its complexity its final.
Nature does minds, minds don't do nature, minds try to understand, partially, the source, the reason of their existence, which is other then itself, as itself moves within the complexity of bigger sets. Knowledge of nature is doomed to be always compressed data of something bigger, thus symbolic representative n not the thing itself.