It depends on what it you are trying to explain. It makes sense to inquire into how experience is put together, which is as much as to investigate the conjoined life of mind and body in their conjoined worlds, but does it make sense to ask what experience is, how there can be any such thing, or to ask whether ontological predicates can properly be applied to it? Among the phenomena of experience consciousness can be considered to play a subsidiary role. What happens is determined by unconscious forces and unconscious thought processes, consciousness comes along for the ride, or presides like a constitutional monarch, a virtual centre of sovereignty. A Samkhya-like separation of Self from mind suggests itself; metaphysically it is quite incoherent, but pragmatically, or heuristically, it is quite effective at making sense of things. Personalities are emergent properties of mind, but only one is endowed with consciousness. It is ineffective but for itself, the others are effective and for it. The structure of the court is mirrored in every family and corporation, but in an imperfect way.