I have never seen a conversation about panpsychism anywhere on the internet that did not quickly become a debate - at least some of them managed to be that pleasant - between people arguing for physicalism and people arguing for panpsychism. This article talks about a gathering at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, NY on September 8-9. It was organized by Philip Goff, and had several philosophers and scientists discussing everything. (I learned about this gathering at the end of September. I live about 25 miles from Marist, and could scream that I knew nothing about it until a few weeks after the fact. Not that I would have had much chance of getting in. But I could have stood on a garbage can and looked in the window.) Goff and physicist Sean Carroll debated the question Is Consciousness Fundamental? (Here's the debate). As the article says:
That's what all the discussions always boil down to.Is there something about consciousness that cannot be accounted for by physical facts alone? Much of the rhetorical ping-pong between Goff and Carroll amounted to Goff answering yes to that question and Carroll answering no.
I want something different. I want to talk about panpsychism. So the rule of Panpsychism Discussions is that it's about panpsychism.
If you want to argue against panpsychism, that's fine. But please do so in the Not Panpsychism forum.