If one argues that consciousness is emergent, or some combination of emergent and socially driven (meeting half-way) in some kind of dual scaffolding (or three-way if you want to include consciousness being somewhere in evolutionary state space, affording … oh i’m not going to try mapping it out) – and from there argue that our ability to imagine (further driven by these processes and more) has moved us away from a less immediately responsive reaction system and towards a system with the ability to complete the turnings of probability wheels based upon past emotionally impressed (vulcanized) states within a lifetime (or recent generations if epigenetically), and on top of THAT system, being so far removed from that, what we believe is consciousness isn’t the actual consciousness but illusionary as it’s constructed out of secondary and tertiary responses and not out of some 1:1 relationship between “outside” and “inside”…
…MAYBE they could have a justified point.
But I think they’re being very flat about it instead.