The whole article is juvenile sophistry. It is obvious that consciousness is not an attribute of matter or indeed of any physical thing, and certainly not the “brain” per se.
If it were, then anesthesia would be impossible and consciousness would survive death, but not decay.
Consciousness is itself a process - and is an aggregation of thousands of processes, many of which take place in physical living cells and organs, but consciousness is not in any way physical or material. Of course there is the eternal philosophical “touching” problem that will be discussed without end (not by me), but this author is writing like a third grader when everyone around him is in graduate school.
Time is a different expression in that realm, different from that of your body chemistry. Your assertion, indirectly, that consciousness does not survive when the body decays is founded upon nothing that would prove such. With that said, consciousness exists in a coordinate system because without time events do not occur and without space a thing does not exist. Consciousness does exist.
As you say, processes take place in cells. And consciousness is a process and an aggregate of many processes.
Does consciousness take place?
Everyone's gotta start somewhere.
If it were, then anesthesia would be impossible and consciousness would survive death, but not decay.
You bring up an interesting point that begs the question;
Why does anesthesia affect the conscious and not the subconscious ?
We could go even further. How can a hypnotist put your 'conscious' to 'sleep' with a snap of the fingers ....and.... how is it that your 'mind' can still then communicate and perform physical tasks ?
Consciousness is itself a process - and is an aggregation of thousands of processes, many of which take place in physical living cells and organs, but consciousness is not in any way physical or material.
Each cell in the body is intelligent, ergo it seems logical that the 'mind' is, at a minimum, an aggregate consensus of all the cells.