Your position is that your entire experience is not part of reality. Sure, you can define "reality" that way if you want, but it's obviously omitting something

Your position is that your entire experience is not part of reality. Sure, you can define "reality" that way if you want, but it's obviously omitting something that exists, so it's not going to be a popular definition. And how can you base your moral/spiritual outlook on a view of reality that omits the central aspect of your world? Or another say of saying the same thing: I dispute that there's nothing useful or actionable to be found in the mystery of consciousness, even if it's true that we can't hope to make any further headway in our scientific understanding of it (which I also think is false). Which brings me back to my original point. Dennett's real issue is that he correctly senses that acknowledging this wonderful mystery of the mind is at odds with his physicalist, and somewhat nihilistic, view of the universe.