Mostly bizarre.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...en-we-die/

Excerpts:

'The hypothesis that the brain creates consciousness, however, has vastly more evidence for it than the hypothesis that consciousness creates the brain.'

'Neuroscientists can predict human choices from brain-scanning activity before the subject is even consciously aware of the decisions made.'

'Thousands of experiments confirm the hypothesis that neurochemical processes produce subjective experiences.'

In other words, consciousness is a function of neurochemical activity that takes place in the brain.  When the brain ceases to function, consciousness can no longer exist.

In future, you should probably check what science has to say about a given topic before posting here.  It might make you look (slightly) less like a drooling imbecile.

Boru

One more fool that doesn't know that hypothesis are not evidence has spoken.  

And what about the point that ..........when the brain ceases to function, consciousness can no longer exist...........

Let me correct your writing Boru.
You should rather say..............when the brain ceases to function, consciousness can no longer stay inside the brain.........



Why the consciousness should stay one minute more inside a dead brain?
Would you stay inside the wreck of your car one minute more?

For God's sake Boru.
Can't you think properly before you come down with this sort of garbage?  

Clearly, you missed (or - what is more likely - ignored) this bit:

'Thousands of experiments confirm the hypothesis that neurochemical processes produce subjective experiences.'

An experiment which confirms an hypothesis qualifies as evidence.  What there is NO evidence for is the loopy idea that consciousness proceeds (or persists, if you like) without neurochemical processes.  Neurochemical processes have never, ever, not once, been observed to occur in a dead brain.

You're an idiot.

Boru