I certainly agree that scientific progress isn’t bound by our intuitions. Much that we thought was obvious, given our intuitions, turned out to be wrong on the universe’s scale.

We typically need our intuitions, though, to understand what we’re talking about. In quantum mechanics, physicists can measure the phenomenon with great precision and can work with their theories in rigorous ways. But they have essentially no clue what they’re dealing with because the quantum events are wildly counterintuitive.

The same seems true with respect to consciousness, which is roughly the point of this article: the hard problem of consciousness (of explaining qualia) can be deflated by mysterianism, by the suspicion that the problem is due to our mental barriers, not to any supernatural properties of consciousness.

However, I have another article on consciousness coming out next week which takes a different tack.

As for sleep, I don’t think it falsifies what I’m saying here because sleep isn’t absolute and consciousness typically only changes degrees in sleep rather than being shut off altogether. The fear of death is existential and universal, and it seems to contribute to the cognitive barrier in question. Both death and consciousness are in some ways unthinkable.