I agree with the conclusion. I i would take exception with e beating reductionism. We're never going to solve it. It's not like one more narro science experiment or theory is going to have the answer. Constitutive panpsychism, i think, is physically incoherent because it makes this naive assumption that sub atomic particles are actually little bodies delineated in space. But that's just a metaphor. And if you really understand what sub atomic particles are, then then constitutive panpsychism becomes incoherent. It doesn't work. Thatw that turn in the history of science in that direction has led us to this hard problem of consciousness that really is kind of misconfig
In this expansive conversation, Michael Shermer speaks with Bernardo Kastrup, the executive director of Essentia Foundation. His work has been leading the modern renaissance of metaphysical idealism, the notion that reality is essentially mental. He has a Ph.D. in philosophy (ontology, philosophy of mind) and another Ph.D. in computer engineering (reconfigurable computing, artificial intelligence). Shermer and Kastrup discuss: materialism, idealism, dualism, monism, panpsychism, free will, determinism, consciousness, the problem of other minds, artificial intelligence, out of body and near-death experiences, model dependent realism, and the ultimate nature of reality.