>>24860752 (OP)
I think a lot of people misinterpret illusionism to mean that consciousness in its totality is somehow not real or something.
What Dennett is getting at is more so that a lot of the qualities we typically attribute to consciousness are illusions. The one easiest to demonstrate is the discrete and unified nature of our perceptual field. Much of Consciousness Explained is Dennett demonstrating through various example, that there is no singular and discrete succession of conscious states, and therefore no final terminus of stimuli (what he calls the “Cartesian theater” where something finally becomes “perceived.” But rather that a bunch of small discriminations from various sense faculties are stitched and edited together, sometimes retroactively, and then memory serves to solidify a general narrative succession of discrete events, often incorrectly or streamlined in a practical way
