Words like realism and idealism are misleading actually, because ideal is a projection of human thought in all realms. And what's real is independent of what our idealism states. Be that as it may, why is it not meaningful to at least inquire into whether physical constructs of ordinary experience are in fact illusory, epiphenomena?

The ordinary materialistic worldview is apparently real and certainly one level of explanation and a useful one too. But the point of that quote is that it is not viable at the ultimate level in the light of quantum physics and all the weird properties of matter that we have seen in experiments after experiments.

Consciousness associated with life is one with specific content, limited by the processing abilities of each organism. And nonliving things do not have that kind of consciousness surely. But should we at least not explore whether the perfect order of the infinite universe with all its physical laws is therefore intelligent and essentially conscious? Being conscious does not mean there is an entity who is conscious. Even at our experiential level, thinking does not mean there is a thinker. Thinking happens and we superimpose a thinker upon the thinking. Neuroscience is very clear there is no self or center in the brain that thinks.

Rather than conclude that the apparent reality is all there is or take comfort in belief systems which atheists are right to criticize, we need to be inquiring both individually and collectively into these questions on what is real, really.