In my recent essay on panpsychism (the view that consciousness is a fundamental property), I was highly critical of the position defended by a small number of philosophers, with Philip Goff, as its public face, comparing it to creationism and even using the term "pseudophilosophy." The subtitle of my essay was “On the pseudophilosophy of panpsychism and its parallel to creationism.”

I regret using that term now somewhat, not because I have changed my mind, but because the term immediately provokes a defensive reaction and makes a neutral evaluation of my arguments more difficult. I saw a comment, in a response piece to my post by Nino Kadić, that they were immediately annoyed and could not move far beyond the title, and perhaps this is unsurprising. To call someone’s philosophical view "pseudophilosophical" can feel like being called a fool, or worse, a deliberate scam artist peddling snake oil.

This was also the interpretation taken by some of my readers who wholeheartedly celebrated my take, expressing gratitude that finally someone called out what may be summarized as........

© Psychology Today