Which is more likely(or intuitive): that consciousness is an emergent property of matter, or that matter is a mental construct of consciousness? The latter seems to win the law of Occam's Razor, as it only requires the assumption that consciousness exists. On the other hand, emergent consciousness (from matter) requires the assumption that matter/space-time is fundamental to the universe and that consciousness somehow (supernaturally I suppose) emerges from matter. Yet consciousness is something so completely incompatible with matter, a relationship so nonsensical, that it is un-contrastable. It's a whole different form of existence... so different in fact, that this "emerging" consciousness may be thought of as emerging from nothing at all(a big bang of sorts). Or, it could be that matter/space-time and consciousness are fundamental aspects of existence. Either way seems incomprehensible though. Doesn't it make a lot more intuitive sense that consciousness is the only thing that actually exists?