BTW. here is an example of your shoddy and partial reading of the source. DIRECTLY before the section you quoted is this:
Panpsychism doesn’t necessarily imply that every inanimate object is conscious. “Panpsychists usually don’t take tables and other artifacts to be conscious as a whole,” writes Hedda Hassel Mørch, a philosophy researcher at New York University’s Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, in an email
but nooo you cannot have that. so you seek out the view you like to bash in the article and proceed to bash it, even though it wasn't the point of the article which I brought up.