So if you know someone who communicates the same ideas in a different way, I'd really appreciate it.
For what it's worth, I come from a mainstream scientific background, and my own view on this subject is not heavily based on Lipton's.
You said "Apparently it doesn't occur to a lot of people that if mind and body are one and the same, mind activity must surely be deeply interconnected to physiology". People aren't rejecting the logic, they're reacting against the language, because it sounds like the language of a group that are an out-group for science-y people
Most people who reflexively dismiss the mind+body link haven't heard of Lipton.
Rejection of this concept is the default for conventionally-minded people in western society, because we've been conditioned over generations to see the mind and body as separate entities (likely due, ironically enough, to religion), and consequently it's a largely unquestioned assumption in medical orthodoxy.
People who are enthusiasts for modern science (i.e., devotees of Richard Dawkins, staunch atheists, etc), seem particularly resistant to questioning this orthodoxy.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. My own worldview is not heavily based on Lipton's. I just suggested it to give people something to start out on, in case it takes me some time to write my own doc.
Like everyone else here, you're welcome to contact me for a copy. I'd welcome your constructive feedback.
His presentation style is not for everyone, sure. Nobody’s is. He talks in pictures and metaphors, which for many people is the most effective way to receive information.
Not you? No worries!
But consider that you’re only talking about persuasiveness of language/presentation for yourself, not science.
The very quote you picked out to mock is perfectly valid science.