This reading assumes that skeptics are realists of some sort, or that they privilege realism as a hypothesis over idealism. The original question does not state this, so idealistic or neutral skeptics may be unfairly biased by this interpretation.
Fair enough. I should have said something like: “A mind-independent reality might exist, and if it does then we lack epistemic access to it.”
Fair enough. I should have said something like: “A mind-independent reality might exist, and if it does then we lack epistemic access to it.”