thanks. I mean, it's a great read - I'm just always on the
   lookout for either a BS factor or at least a glossed-over
   factor.

   If the person represents the uncontrolled subconscious, and his
   theory is the explanation for the uncontrolled subconscious,
   then that means his theory is the replacement for the
   subconscious, at least in a 'meta" way. This is something that's
   true for any theories of the mind, but this one even more so
   because, in the process, he is attempting to eliminate control
   of consciousness altogether.

   This.. puts his theory in control of all humanity's conscious
   thoughts, in a sense, making him the final person (or team) with
   a controlled consciousness - to have been able to come up with
   this theory in the first place.

   [that is, if this theory became defacto standard, rather than a
   nice speculative read with some interesting ideas and some
   interesting evidence behind it]

   It's a dramatic THEREFORE THUS. [Thus, conscience control is
   REALLY [x]). - so that engages my analyzer. If someone's going
   to take away my sense of freedom of choice - whatever its
   reality/unreality is, I'm going to give it my best to see if
   it's valid/invalid/solid/has holes/etc.