I don't buy panpsychism. <br><br>If you are going to start with the very thing you are trying to explain then you are not explaining everything. To say it is all consciousness is a copout and we are still left with 'WHAT is it?' and 'HOW did it come to be?' As Dennett pointed out, in order to explain consciousness one must begin with unconscious elements. <br><br>Having said this, I also don't buy the eliminativist view because consciousness clearly exists: it cannot be an illusion because to proclaim it so is to admit that the seeming is in fact the reality and the mystery remains. <br><br>I also do not think consciousness does anything other than being a mere witness. The only influence consciousness has upon physical reality is an indirect one where we can note that subjective experience exists and thus the phenomenon itself sparks interest and influences our discussion about it as a topic. This is also, as far as I am aware, the only cogent argument against epiphenomenalism.<br><br>So much has been said on this subject and yet humans are still clueless about said phenomenon.