Is insisting on calling “consciousness” a real thing appropriate?

Someone who likes to ask rhetorical questions on the internet once questioned whether it was appropriate to describe “consciousness” as a reification since in one sutta (MN 43) it is said that consciousness and wisdom/enlightenment were conjoined: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/26807/if-consciousness-is-a-reification-how-does-a-buddha-attain-the-truth An apparent contradiction arises when looking at another question offered by the same person: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/questions/26367/why-did-the-lord-buddha-criticize-natthikav%C4%81da%E1%B9%83-moral-nihilism The OP seems to like the answer to the second question which stated: > “When … consciousness exists, because of grasping consciousness and insisting on consciousness, the view arises” of moral nihilism.” Could it be that this *“insisting on consciousness”* as an objective real thing leads to unethical behavior (moral nihilism) just as the Buddha warned and others concurred: https://buddhism.stackexchange.com/a/26814/13375