Strawson’s Panpsychism
Philosopher Galen Strawson calls panpsychism “the most parsimonious, plausible and indeed ‘hard-nosed’ position that any physicalist who is remotely realistic about the nature of reality can take up in the present state of our knowledge.”
Verified*
Galen Strawson
Philosopher & Literary Critic
Galen Strawson is a British analytic philosopher and literary critic known for his work on consciousness, free will, and the self. He holds a chair at the University of Texas at Austin and has taught at Oxford and other universities. He is also a long-time literary reviewer and the son of philosopher P. F. Strawson.
Key Takeaways
Core Claim
Consciousness is a fundamental feature of matter, making panpsychism the most realistic physicalist stance.
How It Works
Reframes panpsychism as “real materialism,” expanding physicalism to include experiential properties.
Distinguishing Idea
Treats panpsychism not as anti-materialist, but as the only consistent form of true physicalism.
Strawson’s Panpsychism
Philosopher Galen Strawson calls panpsychism “the most parsimonious, plausible and indeed ‘hard-nosed’ position that any physicalist who is remotely realistic about the nature of reality can take up in the present state of our knowledge” (Strawson, 2008, 2011). Conversely, he calls the denial of “conscious experience, the subjective character of experience, the ‘what-it-is-like’ of experience,” in his words, “the silliest claim ever made” (Strawson, 2018).
Strawson is a sophisticated (and unabashed) champion of panpsychism, yet I decided to classify his theory under Monism, the next category, not here under Panpsychism. The reason is the prominence of his argument to subsume panpsychism under his enlarged understanding of “materialism” or “physicalism”—amplified by his insistence that, in essence, committing to panpsychism makes one a “real materialist” or “real physicalist” (Strawson, 2009) (see “Strawson's Realistic Monism and Real Materialism”). Strawson's social constructivist view: “Panpsychism is not a new theory, but it is newly popular, and it is still widely held to be ‘absurd’. It remains to be seen whether it will ever advance to ‘obvious’”[1] (Strawson, 2019b).
Footnote
[1]. Strawson's quote follows his reference to William James: “‘First, you know, a new theory is attacked as absurd,’ William James once remarked; ‘then it is admitted to be true, but obvious and insignificant; finally it is seen to be so important that its adversaries claim that they themselves discovered it.’”
Tools
CiteCategories
References
Footnotes
1.
Strawson's quote follows his reference to William James: “‘First, you know, a new theory is attacked as absurd,’ William James once remarked; ‘then it is admitted to be true, but obvious and insignificant; finally it is seen to be so important that its adversaries claim that they themselves discovered it.’”