Phenomenal consciousness is often thought to carry special moral weight, making sentience central to animal ethics. The author argues that if materialism about the mind is correct, phenomenal consciousness is probably not especially normatively significant. Therefore, we should accept its likely insignificance and develop an ethics that does not rely on sentience.
Illusionists argue that phenomenal consciousness does not exist but merely seems to exist. This view faces a normative challenge concerning the intuitive link between phenomenality and value—for instance, situations seeming good or bad because of the conscious experiences they involve. Illusionists must decide whether to accept or deny this link. Accepting it may lead to revisionary normative consequences, some uncomfortable; denying it requires giving reasons against the link, which is not trivial. The challenge does not disprove illusionism but shows it may have important normative implications that need clarification.