> Derives from consciousness being actually a slow integration of diverse parallel processes. Yes. I might rephrase to highlight possibility that consciousness

> Derives from consciousness being actually a slow integration of diverse parallel processes. Yes. I might rephrase to highlight possibility that consciousness is a form of recursive self-control of the relative timebases of those many parallel, and only roughly synchronized neural processes. Modulating relative synchrony (parasynchrony) may be as important in cognition and consciousness as the number of spikes per time window. One of the big challenges in consciousness research is the binding problem across systems. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_problem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binding_problem Binding may be explainable by multiplexing and manipulating a set of quantal temporal offset strata spaced a few milliseconds apart from each other. Binding, attention, and even consciousness may involve a set of recursive attentional proceses that shift and shunt active neuronal subcircuits into different temporal offset tiers. A few milliseconds one way or another may be the difference between attending or ignoring a stimulus or proto-thought. An inexact metaphor: imagine a set of adjacent radio channels swapping content to be closer or farther apart in frequency. Neighboring channels snap together if content harmonizes, giving rise to vibrant voice and music. If not, then only low level signal or noise. The recursive modulation of thalamocorticothalamic activity across “chosen” subsets of circuits may be what Douglas Hofstadter was hinting at towards the end of Gödel, Escher, Bach (p 709; Strange Loops as the Crux of Consciousness). What I am adding is the probable CNS circuitry and the idea of temporal multiplexing—-a common theme in both analog and digital processor design and computing.