My concern is the article's conclusion geared towards a sort of dichotomy - the "me" part of the brain vs. the "zombie"/unconscious part of the brain. This seem

My concern is the article's conclusion geared towards a sort of dichotomy - the "me" part of the brain vs. the "zombie"/unconscious part of the brain. This seems contrived and artificial, reminiscent of the discredited "Cartesian theater" models. However, subtracting the conclusion of the article, and just taking the data at face value, is interesting. I think it is consistent with the Daniel Dennet "multiple drafts" model of consciousness, where the brain is effectively a "multi-threaded application", where sometimes thread A is "observed" (conscious) or thread B is "observed" (conscious) but A and B are both still there, whether we are aware of them or not. So basically the "zombies" in the brain are all that there is - it is a multi-threaded application, where each "thread" is a "zombie" to use that terminology. Sometimes this zombie or that interacts with the environmental stimuli to the point of "awareness" but there is no "awareness" per ce, just a lot of unaware threads running around which create the illusion of "self", etc. As far as I understand it anyway. :-)