Traditionally pansychists have attempted to explain how the diversity, the multiplicity of life, and the even more diverse array of material objects that comprise our Universe can all have some semblance of conscious awareness. They want a rational explanation for every subatomic particle partaking as living entities in the condition we call existence.

Do you know any panpsychists? Probably not.

Those who claim to be panpsychists are better described by a grander sounding term - Reconstituted Fragmentalists.

Philosophers offering support for panpsychic views begin with a fundemental assumption that the Universe, both on a grand scale and in our immediate vicinity is intensely fragmented. Consequently their primary focus is to first claim, and then try to justify the claim that every identifiable isolated component of the percieved or detectable world has some form of perceptive consciousness.

That is quite a problem.

I see it somewhat differently. There are no fragments composing the world around us, within us or in any way assembling themselves into a Whole.

I would like to make a claim to being a Panpsychist, and a Solipsist. Some may see something contrary in this claim, but you really need to look carefully at your assumptions and presumptions concerning both pansychism and solipsism, niether of which you are likely to have heard anything about from anyone genuinely committed to such concepts.

To explain these claims we need first to look carefully at the way we treat dictionary definitions.
I am going to put this next section in RED, surrounded by a RED box to emphasis the dangers of taking dictionary definitions too literally.

First remember that dictionaries define one word in terms of other words, and they DO NOT tell you what words MEAN, they tell you how the majority of people USE the word.

PANPSYCHISM-

Definitions are suprisingly variable, examples are-

"The view that all matter has consciousness."
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language.

"A theory that all nature is psychical or has a psychic aspect and that every physical happening participates in the mental.
Merriam-Webster.

The theory that all of nature has a psychic side.
Chambers Dictionary.

The doctrine that the entire universe, or any least subdivision of it, has a mental as well as a physical side or aspect, and that the mental side stands to the physical (for instance, in the atom), precisely as human consciousness stands to the human body. Panpsychism may be monistic, reducing all reality to ultimate mental terms, or dualistic; and, if the latter, may receive an interactionist or a parallelistic interpretation. It is represented in ancient philosophy by hylozoism, has persisted in various forms throughout the history of philosophy...
The Century Dictionary.

NOTE- as already stated these definitions are not giving the word a specific MEANING, they are explaining how the words are generally USED.

SOLIPSISM-

A theory holding that the self can know nothing but its own modifications and that the self is the only existent thing.
Merriam-Webster

The extreme form of scepticism which denies the possibility of any knowledge other than of one's own existence.
Collins English Dictionary.

The belief that only your own experiences and existence can be known.
Cambridge Dictionary.

Making a nuanced distinction between the meaning of a word or term and its explanatory definition in a dictionary helps avoid the assumption that knowing how a term is used gives you a meaningful insight into exactly what it refers to.
Continual use or misuse of presumptious "knowledge" distorts meaning and results in misinterpretation.

Care needs to be taken with all words as improving ones knowledge of a subject inevitably introduces new terms and ideas that may demand a reassessment of what you may accept words as meaning.
For example I may introduce a much less commonly heard term that has great relevance to this discussion- namely:-

Hylozoic.

The Encyclopedia Britannica explains this word as follows-

"Hylozoism is logically distinct both from early forms of animism, which personify nature, and from panpsychism, which attributes some form of consciousness or sensation to all matter."

Merriam-Webster says- "A doctrine held especially by early Greek philosophers that all matter has life."

And Collins Dictionary choses- "The philosophical doctrine that life is one of the properties of matter."

Merriam-Webster and Collins both give definitions that could easily be substituted for "Panpsychic" yet the Encyclopedia Britannica specifically distinguishes Hylozoic from Panpsychic. Who or what should we 'believe'?

WHAT IS LIFE?

Some time before Descartes said "I think therefore I am", God said "It appears I don't exist". God hasn't been seen, despite much praying and pleading, since He noticed His Infinite Absence.

Does a moth whose wing markings so accurately mimic the rock that it rests on also say "see, I don't exist".

Does the question "What is life?" come with any presuppositions? It may be easy to convince you the answer to that question is yes. The "what is" portion of the question is asking for the subject to be separated out from other ideas you may have and given some form of distinguishing features. Perhaps you need some presuppositions to contrast any new notions of life against.
I have a somewhat dfferent view.

LIFE IS UBIQUITOUS.

The thread of this discussion is digressing, deliberately so, as I wish to look a little more into the notion of 'meaning'.
Dictionaries explain how words are used, how we integrate them into a conversational whole. The meaning of individual words within that conversation is determined by context and surrounding terminology.
Words can change their 'meaning' with every outing.

We all carry a basic understanding of the meaning of a significant repotoire of words, but modify that understanding to fit the contextual use to which they are put.
That use may be carefully chosen or accidental. Comedic inuendo relies on the play of word meaning to achieve amusing results whilst defence lawyers may manipulate word meanings in an attempt to allow guilty criminals to go free.

So when I say Life is ubiquitous exactly what do I mean?

I mean that the word ubiquity and its adjective ubiquitous should be taken literally as a dictionary definition.

Definitions are mostly consistent across the range of dictionaries you may consult, so I will chose just one clear and consise entry.
This is from Chambers Dictionary revised 13th edition:-

"UBIQUITY- existence everywhere at the same time; omnipresence."
"UBIQUITOUS- to be found everywhere."

Note the definition uses a synonym for added emphasis to ensure the meaning of everywhere at the same time is clearly referenced.

That synonym is OMNIPRESENCE- a word most associated with an attribute of a God, with Ubiquity being a secular reference to the same property.

SO LIFE IS OMNIPRESENT, THERE IS NOWHERE LIFE IS NOT. THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS NOT LIFE.

So lets sit together, perhaps either side of a table, a table topped with a small piece of rock sitting quietly between us. You have just heard me confidently announcing that life is ubiquitous.
I am going to assume you don't understand why I am saying that, and you are not sure I am correct.

I am assuming you are a skeptic, but are smart enough to recognise that ideas that don't seem quite right are not necessarily quite wrong. You are willing to consider arguments that question your ideas, attitudes and assumptions.

My question is what do YOU think life is?

I have made a very positive statement. I am claiming I know what life is, can you be so confident?
I suspect not.

I think you are intensely withdrawn, you live as a voice in 'your' head, you regard the body as personal property. Your body is given the status of a possession.
Our language reflects this, we speak of my body in contrast to yours, my head, my legs, my heart, my lungs. We exist as a self. You have had that sense of self reinforced since you spoke your first words. Your upbringing emphasised your isolation in a world that was independant and potentially threatening.

I think all ideas of life are dominated by our sense of personal existence. We assume that life requires 'something' to be alive or some form of material entity to be animated by the equivalent of our personal sense of awareness. I am well aware that the intellectually astute will see naivity in this statement and will believe they can ridicule it with a host of justifiable cerebral academic and intelligent conceptual notions of "life". You may well take a plausible approach based on the opinions of others that reproduction and self-replication are key starting points for defining life, but there are far more fundamental personal observations you can make concerning life as it is experienced.
Until we look more carefully into the dominance of our personal sense of the experience of being alive I will remain completely open-minded to all possibilities. Hopefully you will reciprocate.

These ideas will be developed in the relevent pages of tearmaster.art - panpsychism and solipsism.

If we are still sitting at table with a piece of rock sitting between us the status of the rock will be considered a little later. First--

As a follow on from this we should consider our significance, or otherwise, in the Universe.
We need a sense of proportion.

INSIGNIFICANCE