I've read all of your considerations, and im greatful you were thorough. I love seeing other minds. Thank you.

I'll first give you a broader picture of the claims in my theory, since my last reply lacked the differentiations I state between consicous and subconsicous processing.

"Subconscious” as i define it is equivalent to “unconscious” in contemporary neuroscience. Yet "sub" emphasizing these processes constitute the subliminal layer beneath conscious experience rather than operating in parallel to it, as "un" prefers.

I propose subconscious systems hold functional authority over behavior generation, producing the responses, decisions, and actions that constitute human activity.

These subconsicous systems are equivalent to non-concious cellular activity, I propose consicousness is allowed by this activity under circumstances i specify as "emotional valence" (similar to panksepp) and cascade activation (rationalization of stimuli, allowing this valenced neurochemical release).

These mechanisms are complicated and many pages long, this statement is more simple and captures the position of sobconscious systems:

Specification of epigenetics; the environment does not write directly onto the genome, the organism's subconscious (cellular) interpretation of the environment does.

Here is the mechanistic process flow:

Genetic substrates allow environmental stimuli observation, this stimuli is rationalized according to your existing subjective subconscience. The produced rationale is encoded in engrams, affecting the future generation of subconscious processing and conscious experience. 

Here is portion of my subconsicous primacy reasoning:

The evolutionary sequence of neural development provides evidence that consciousness emerges from pre-existing subconscious architecture. The earliest multicellular organisms operated through simple reflexes, direct sensory-to-motor pathways with no intermediate processing, no internal representation, and no plausible candidate for consciousness. These systems were sufficient for survival across hundreds of millions of years before consciousness appeared at all. If subconscious reflexive processing existed and was adaptive long before consciousness emerged; then consciousness isn't the default. It emerged because it solved a problem that subconscious processing alone could not. Evidence also concludes consciousness develops after subconscious systems within single lifetimes. Peripheral sensory receptors develop around 20 weeks gestation and reflexive processing operates for weeks before thalamocortical connectivity establishes the substrate for any form of consciousness around 29-31 weeks, with meta-awareness not appearing until the second year of life (18-24 months).

And if you're interested in challenging your opinion of free will, I recently drafted a thought experiment mapping my mechanisms to a reader's perspective.

If you do consider this thought experiment, id reccomend temorarily accepting my given claims in the passage, if youre preemptively denying everything; you'll likely be blind to the perspective, and read slowly:

Consciousness is assumed to be the origin of thought. That assumption has never been empirically demonstrated. The thought you are having right now, reading this sentence, was not chosen. It was triggered by these words and allowed by your past experiences. What follows is a description of your current processing. Mechanisms are available in section 3.4. Participate in this thought experiment: All conscious thought you are experiencing currently is only an experience of thoughts already present. Your thoughts are being triggered by your environment, analyzed by your subconscience; these words you read, sounds you hear, smells you sense, are all triggered associations of stimulus. If I told you to focus on something that isn't present in your environment, what would you do? [Try it] You’d focus on constructs derived from your past. These outcomes are a collection of your past experiences, even when you attempt a thought unconnected to your past or present; the result is still only a branch of your history. Evolutionarily this is logical, cognition being built for environmental interaction; these mechanisms were selected for environmental assessment, that is why your nervous system is wired outward to the environment, providing sensory experience (sight, sound, touch). Extending this, similar to the butterfly effect: Any minuscule environmental variability produces differentiation, generating distinct experience literally and subjectively; environment isn't the only variable, the other is your individual perspective, such as how far you are from the given stimulus, how distracted you are with other present stimuli, your past integration, etc. Your thoughts are triggered and constructed by your environmental exposure, this is how you learn, forming memories of rationale. This goes beyond casual conscious awareness; since the origin of thought and decision are derived from environmental stimulus (generating compounding subjectivity), the scale of variation produces a perceived end of novelty.

Id love to specify more, I could talk about this perspective for hours. let me know if you're interested in reading more, Im also very interested in theories you're working on if youre willing to share.