It's true that there are some people who dismiss discussion of idealism and solipsism as a waste of time, but then there are also plenty of trained scientists who seriously consider and model ideas like multiverses and that we are in a simulation. The reality is that building models of reality or developing logical systems that are exploratory and not based in evidence is a part of science. But you cannot claim they are reality until you link them to data.

So if considering panpsychism and idealism are under the purview of logical positivism, even if most people would consider it a waste of their time and choose to spend their efforts somewhere else, then what other forms of knowing are there? Something that dismisses logic entirely, or posits an immeasurable form of the soul, or makes other grand dogmatic statements that cannot be supported? Why should I believe in heaven and hell versus reincarnation and entry into Buddha-lands versus an infinite list of other things I could invent?

I think part of this article's problem is mixing together the traditions and institutions of science with bare statements about logic and sensory experience.