Huh? You do by looking at it, like you do any other physical thing.
So you are “studying” a dead organ for sign of life/consiousness? Strange.
You’re the one who brought up studying a dead brain, not me. I simply said that as a brain dies, so too dies consciousness. This we know from literally centuries of studying people with brain injuries.
And those brains you study ... by studying people with brain injuries.
Some people lose the ability to speak after having a stroke. That doesn’t mean their ability to speak has leaked out and is floating off somewhere near Alpha Centauri, it means that their ability to speak has been destroyed, the same way you can destroy a computer’s ability to do certain functions by taking an awl to its motherboard.
No the analogy I gave is consciousness. The water is consciousness, the bucket is the mind.
I know the analogy you were trying to give. My point is that it’s a bad analogy. Consciousness is not a physical substance like water, and it is even less a mental substance like a ghost. It is a process, akin to the process that goes on in your computer when it’s working.
OK, fair enough. But then why are you defending the proposition that your consciousness outlives your brain?
And are you attached to your non-attachment?
The consciousness is outside of the mind. Its always there. You can cut parts of the mind and know that other parts form the consciousness. Only when you destroy the mind completely that consciousness has no way to show itself. If you cut parts of mind, the other parts bring the consciousness forward. When you destroy the mind its not longer capable of bringing the consciousness forward but its still there.
This doesn’t answer either of my questions.
And it doesn’t make sense. Viz.:
What do you mean that your consciousness is outside of the mind?
How far outside the mind does it exist?
Does this mean that the mind exists without consciousness? If not, what does it mean?
And how do you claim to get all these insights? Where is your data?