In some regards I can certainly see Jayne's theory as correct with regards to the arising of consciousness as a mechanical function between the self and the environment in which the self exists, which results in a symbolic translation that expresses varying degrees of dissonance and harmony.

But there is also a clearly defined conceptual boundary which humans have surpassed, which is the capacity to not merely react to their environment, but to act as an equally dominating force of it. The nature of the reflective mind contained in it's environment; reacting and translating what is observed into what is perceived: it is one of dissonance and harmony, and results in uncontrollable chaos. Man is a function of his environment, instead of defining the environment.

It is the will to exceed one's own expectations, as an creature of nature, and as a consciousness. When we have crafted an entire networked world that begins on a completely conceptual level, I think the question of what we are, and what we have become, and the control we have over that, deserves more than a cursory thought.

It's that looping around the argument that causes it to collapse. I use my mind to explain my mind. The model doesn't fit the current data, only all the data leading up to it.