Your thinking is all over the place. Earlier today you were happy to accept that a goose has conscious perception (when it is awake) but no soul. Now you are denying it again. All higher animals, like us, have a consciouness stream, that is, unless you are a solipsist. Any creature without a stream of conscious experience would be dead in no time at all. You need to make your mind up.
I did not accept that a goose has conscious perception (at least not consciously!). I was inferring that a goose can easily behave in a goose like way by just reacting to outside stimulae without need of conscious perception. It is conscious perception which allows us to override our natural instinctive reactions by invoking free will. A goose can perceive and react as in a biological robot with no need for conscious perception.
OK, its clear to me now, part of the problem is the vocabulary, I think you either misunderstand or misuse the terminology, hence we end up talking at cross purposes to some extent. Conscious perception, as opposed to subconscious perception, is about perception that has made it into our stream of conscious experience. Subconscious perception includes things that we have seen or heard, but without realising it, subliminal advertising for example. A goose has conscious perception, so does a warthog, so does a haddock, there is no particular reason to think otherwise, and they make choices that are informed by their conscious experience. notwithstanding the complication of consciousness lag.
If you accept that clarification as valid, then presumably you agree that inner experiences - hopes, pleasures, fears, temptations, hunger, drowsiness, pains, thirst for instance - all these sensations are created by brains as part of the natural production of consciousness without the need for a soul as these things are universal to some degree or other amongst all animals. And to that extent, there is no need to posit a 'perceiver' inside us, watching our stream of consciousness.