Isn't the parent and related answers pointing towards the idea that there's a level of complexity above which you need to be to see those qualia? A single little circuit might not be the one that is conscious, but a bunch of them connected together might exhibit patterns that we could call experience?

Maybe the analogy is that a single DNA molecule is not a living thing but that molecule along with a bunch of others is?

Seems like the problem arises in pinning down what level of complexity is required.

It's worth pointing out that there's zero evidence that complexity is required for conscious. Our only evidence that beings other than ourselves are conscious is that we know ourselves to be conscious and they seem similar to us. IF inanimate objects were conscious, we wouldn't know because... well, none of us actually has direct evidence than anything other than ourselves is conscious.

I broadly agree with this, and it's been my feeling since reading Dennett & Hofstadter in my teens and twenties.

However, if this does turn out to be true, I suspect that it will not constitute an "explanation" of experience, merely a description of its prerequisites.