In his view, “ “Consciousness ” is a meaningless term that too often misleads us, and it shouldn’t be used in medicine, neuroscience, or philosophy:
“Consciousness” is a very vague term and, ultimately, I don’t think it has any useful meaning at all, apart from other categories such as sensation, perception, imagination, reason etc. Aristotle had no distinct term for it. Nor do I think did any of the ancient or medieval philosophers. Consciousness is a modern term that seems to subsume all of the sensate powers of the soul — sensation, perception, sensus communis, imagination, memory, sensory appetite, etc. …
The difficulty in defining “consciousness” is well recognized in medicine. For example, I ask medical students and residents who report to me that a patient is “unconscious” to explain exactly what they mean. Do they mean “sleeping,” “not moving,” “eyes are closed,” or “not answering questions”? After all, patients who are in coma often move and even brain-dead patients usually have reflexes. If a patient is unconscious while sleeping, he may still be dreaming, in which case he is quite aware of his dream, and thus “unconscious while asleep” doesn’t really mean unaware of everything, it just means unaware of some things.
Michael Egnor, “Does the ability to think depend on consciousness?” at Mind Matters News
You may also enjoy this article by Michael Egnor: Why critical theory might shape your life, going forward. Critical Theory has begun to rule the public square and we need to understand it.