[protonfish]

The problem with panpsychism is not that it is unnecessary or not anthropocentric, but that it is provably false. If everything was conscious then full anesthetic (removal of consciousness with neurotoxic chemicals) wouldn't work.

It does work though, which makes it clear that consciousness is a property produced by a mechanism in the brain.

[zmgsabst]

That’s a strawman though.

Pansychism says that everything manifests qualia, not that you can’t change what kind of qualia with drugs — obviously you can, as anyone who has taken recreational ones knows. You can also change it with a bullet, though that doesn’t revert after.

[simondw]

Panpsychism doesn't claim that everything has complex sensory perception, higher reasoning, memory, etc. The hard problem isn't about any of those things, which indeed have clear neuronal correlates and can easily be turned off.

The idea is that there's always "something that it's like to be X", where X can equally be a conscious human, an anesthetized human, a dead human, or an electron.

[protonfish]

Can this be measured? Does panpsychism predict a difference in worlds that have this property versus those that don't? I don't think it does, but maybe I'm missing something. If it's impervious to empirical evidence then I don't think it has sufficient rigor to be considered a viable hypothesis.

[sdwr]

Then where did the brain come from? Turtles all the way down!