Explain about thought
Extrasensory perceptions
Coordination works smoothly
Its property is strong testimony
Its offspring is the richness of life

Thank you very much.
I think that regarding the laws of nature, it is easy to explain that what we think is true really is true. Because God already created, from the outset at the stage of creation, a coordination between created beings and our cognition of the universe. For example, that the simple thing is the correct one.

Why do you know there is coordination, according to your view? It seems to me that this is the reasonable assumption after we manage to predict the world fairly well. And it is also an axiomatic assumption of thought. But do you have other or additional reasons?

In any case, according to your view, if you perceive the world through extrasensory perception, then you need to explain how exactly that is built, and to me that sounds like an impossible explanation. Because this is a part that is not accessible to us in the world or in the public domain, something like Prof. Leibowitz's remarks about the psychophysical problem.

I know because I see (= with the mind's eye, intuition). According to your view, this is only a conclusion that you infer, not direct seeing. I think the description of direct seeing fits our actual experience better.
I see no reason why I would need to explain anything. It simply exists because that is how I feel it. Do feelings need an explanation? And wouldn't that explanation itself need an explanation?
But that is not really the main point. Even if you define the coordination between thought and the world as a coordination that has no mechanism that brings it about, still, de facto there is coordination, and de facto this can be defined as cognitive perception. There is no real difference between the two possibilities.

Agreed. The perception really is that you do not think you understand correctly and only then conclude that there is coordination between you and the world; rather, it is simply clear to you to understand what is correct. But you still need to think that that extrasensory perception is coordinated with the world, and then we are back to a skeptical question that requires the argument from epistemology. But here it is one level lower, and maybe that is an advantage.

I agree that ordinary feelings do not need explaining, but extrasensory perception does seem to require explanation, for several reasons.
First, unlike physical senses, here the perception is really not intuitive in the way sight or hearing is, and the fact is that many deny that such a sense even exists at all. And your books are an innovation, not the accepted view in our time.
– Many studies were done in the 1960s and ruled out all the evidence for the existence of extrasensory perception.
– It adds yet more information to the total matter in the world, so that from today every atom has an electron, proton, neutron, and information for extrasensory synthetic discoveries.
Each of these examples by itself is enough to show that this is an enormous novelty.

What coordination is there between thought and the world?
There is coordination between thought and what is comfortable for us to think. And what is comfortable for us to think is not always coordinated with the world.