Hi Daniel

Yes, I am curious about other people's views. But I doubt if the Chalmers questionnaire is any real help there. It's much too rough and ready an instrument. (E.g. people may answer "yes" or "no"  to a question for all kinds of different reasons.  Much better to read the articles etc they have written.)

On your second point, I wasn't thinking of elementary propositions such as whether unicorns exist. (Why, incidentally, does modern philosophy so often choose artificial cases like this?  It's like the bizarre world of "thought experiments".) I was thinking about significant arguments - e.g. about the nature of human consciousness, or language, or art.  In this kind of context, I don't give a tinker's curse what the majority view is. As I said, it's the quality of an argument that counts. Nothing more, nothing less.

Let's take my own field - philosophy of art. I can think of several issues where the consensus is probably 9 out of 10 people working in the field, but where I would not be part of that consensus. And in these cases, it wouldn't matter to me if the consensus were 999,999 out of 1,000,000, or more; I would still not agree. One doesn't decide philosophical arguments on the numbers. Leave that to the politicians.

DA