Is Panpsychism at Odds with Science?

Panpsychism, the view that consciousness is a fundamental feature of all matter, is often criticized as unscientific. This commentary argues that panpsychism is not a scientific hypothesis itself but is not in conflict with science either. The author agrees with Goff that panpsychism is a scientific worldview in the sense that it accords with and embraces what science reveals. The paper explores what it means to 'accord with and embrace' science, a point of dispute, and attempts to untangle the different threads in both academic and popular discourse about what counts as scientific or unscientific.

Study at a glance

Abstract

Galileo's Error is a superlative work of public philosophy, particularly as a way of introducing modern academic panpsychism to a broader audience. In this commentary, I reflect on an issue that is prominent, though often with different background concerns, in both academic and popular discourse: what it means to be 'scientific' or 'unscientific'. Panpsychism is not itself a scientific hypothesis, but neither is it (as critics sometimes claim) in conflict with science. Indeed, Goff argues, and I agree, that panpsychism is an eminently scientific worldview, in the sense of a way of viewing reality that accords with and embraces what science reveals. But what exactly it means to 'accord with and embrace' science is disputed; this paper tries to untangle some of the threads.