One issue I found with the videos is that it seemed to say consciousness is real, and since it is real, it can be incorporated into the philosophy of physicalism.
Like the quote I gave.
"if you want to be a real physicalist, well, you have to be a realist about consciousness because that's the most certainly known phenomenon there is. So you're going to have to go all the way and say that conscious states are themselves literally physical just like electric charge. And when I say conscious states I don't mean anything reductive in any sense, I mean that, the so-called qualia for you to believe in. The real thing that we all know about."
I do like that he said that consciousness is the most certainly known phenomenon. That seems obvious because the most basic thing you know, your personal awareness or experience and all that entails.
It seems possible, the idea that physical matter as being the base of reality, would have caused the problem that consciousness is an illusion or, somehow not real.
But he doesn't actually show that the philosophy or theory of physicalism fits in with there being literally real consciousness (here, at least). He says that conscious states are certainly real and so literally physical. But that does not seem to me to get around the interactive problem, but is possibly defining consciousness, as physical, just like an electric charge. But most don't think of electric charges as having subjective experience with intentionality. This is probably where panpsychism comes in. The physical has the mental aspect.
Granted, I am not as knowledgeable on this subject and may be dragging the discussion down, which is not my intention. Just thinking about it. From my vantage point it does almost seem like the mind is being 'defined' as physical. And from there you can be a realist about your own mind and also no longer have the interaction problem. Both the mind and body are physical, with a mental aspect, and so can now interact
It made me wonder if there could be tests showing evidence that the mind can function outside of the body, maybe such as psychokinesis abilities. Could that also fit within physicalism, since consciousness would be "physical", yet having created a causal interaction outside of the body? It also had me wondering, if somehow heaven, or the afterlife, was somehow probable, could consciousness still be defined as physical? The problem might be, what is meant by the word "physical"? Because, above, the word physical appears to mean "real". Or maybe the word physical means, material substance, and the literal consciousness that everyone experiences is a physical reality or substance, and so real.