Zach Blaesi (2021) has constructed a moral parody argument against panpsychism. Some panpsychists argue that the kind of experience we pre-theoretically believe in must be grounded in experience at the fundamental level, on the basis that the traditional options of physicalism and dualism are inadequate. If we carry over this line of reasoning to meta-ethics, Blaesi thinks, we would argue that the kind of moral facts we pre-theoretically believe in, e.g. torturing children for fun is wrong, are grounded in facts about fundamental normative properties instantiated by micro-level entities, a kind of ‘panmoralism.’ Blaesi hopes his reader will reject this line of reasoning to the absurd position of panmoralist; by analogy, they ought to reject the analogous line of reasoning to panpsychism. However, Einar Duenger Bohn (2018) defends a form of ‘pannormism’ (there is normativity all the way down to the fundamental level of reality), which resembles the rather unusual form of panpsychism (2019) Bohn has also explored.