Curious to know

[Angrboda]

More bare assertions.  It is normal that a brain trauma will affect consciousness if that consciousness is a product of the brain.  If consciousness is separate from the brain then you have an event that requires explanation for how it can occur.  Simply declaring that it's normal doesn't explain anything.  You're claiming that a change in the physical affects what you claim is non-physical.  How?  You've offered no mechanism, just the bare assertion that it does.  That's not demonstrating anything, it's just making things up.  I can make up bare assertions all day long, it's meaningless.


More bare assertions.  Do you have any actual evidence that consciousness is not a product of the brain besides some questionable NDE accounts?


Do you actually know how to make anything other than an unsupported argument?  I asked you earlier to back up your assertions with evidence and you declined.  It appears the reason you declined is because you can't back up your assertions with evidence.  Again, pointing out that we can't yet 'see' consciousness in the brain is an argument from ignorance.  It's conclusion is simply not reliable, so you've said nothing but a non sequitur.  Your conclusion doesn't follow from what you've provided.  That we can't currently pinpoint consciousness in the brain is not itself evidence that consciousness does not lie in the brain.  It's a false argument.  So once again you've got nothing to back up your claim that consciousness is intangible.

The consciousness lie in the brain as a driver lie in the vehicle.
That doesn't mean that the vehicle is the driver or the other way around
or that the brain is the consciousness or the other way around.
The two are just two separate things that they are stuck together until physical death occur.
Would you die when your car become a wreck?
Why should you?
You are not the car.
With the same logic you are not the brain.  

And more bare assertions. You really got nothing.