Clever turnabout of my post, which said ths same thing about "Spirit." However, although it's a nice try, it doesn't quite do what you hoped it would do. Consciousness, which is largely an unexplored and poorly understood phenomenon, is nevertheless quite different from spirit. Consciousness has an objectively verifiable existence (as spirit does not). We know, and can easily demonstrate, that consciousness has an electrical component. It appears to be electro-chemical in nature, and the objective evidence of its existence (all those graphic printouts) appear to cease when the host organism dies. So the evidence suggests that consciousness exists within, is a component of, and requires a living organism. None of this evidence exists for "spirit." It is sometimes suggested that consciousness has a "spiritual" component too, but the objectively verifiable evidence for that, as with spirit in general, does not exist.
So you are saying when the tracings are present the organism is conscious? That would be news to someone under the knife.
So what is the materialistic explanation for consciousness then? You claim it exists, yet it seems to be completely immaterial! I thought that atheists claim that if you cannot touch it, eat it or make love to it, it does not exist.