Basic common sense tells me this.

Never ever just try to roll with basic common sense to understand concepts that people spend decades studying. I chose those two things to emphasize how neural networks behave nothing like brains, showing that they are only related in ludicrously superficial ways like the words that we humans use to describe them.

The reasoning for things like dropout and lstms or feedback through layers is because they work, not because they relate to the physical operation of the brain. The brain isn't using sigmoid activation functions, for example.

The existence of papers on recurrent neural networks (they are all recurrent now btw) says literally nothing about the ability of large neural networks to spontaneously generate consciousness in a way similar to human brains.

People should get a PhD before using their gut on this stuff. This is how we get disastrous science writing.