This is a complete travesty of what is actually the case. What very few people seem to know, or understand, is that science completely leaves out consciousness in its description of reality. Indeed, so far as science is concerned, we might as well all be what has been termed philosophical zombies -- that is to say we might as well all be entirely devoid of any conscious experiences whatsoever, even though we externally look and behave exactly like real people.
This is because it is held that we are merely very sophisticated biological machines. Thus it is the physical events in our brains, together with the input from our 5 senses, which wholly explains everything we ever do, say, and think. In and of itself consciousness is not regarded as having any causal efficacy. Hence I am typing this out, not because of an intent on my part to express certain ideas, but due to physical laws playing out.
Now materialists deny this, but only by advancing a transparently false metaphysical hypothesis. This hypothesis is that consciousness is the very same thing as the underlying neuronal activity, or it is the very same thing as what the brain does. Note here they are not saying that such processes causes or produces consciousness, rather consciousness is one and the very same thing as some physical process.
It seems to me transparently clear that such a claim is vacuous. Physical things and processes are characterised by mass, electric charge and so on. They have a location, they can be measured and anyone can potentially observe them. Conscious experience, on the other hand, is wholly defined by its qualitativeness -- the pain of a toothache, the taste of Pepsi, the experience of greenness, the feeling of contentment -- all these are paradigmatic examples of conscious experiences, or qualia as they are sometimes referred to. Most importantly ones consciousness can only be known by you, no one else can observe your pain, your jealousy and so on. Since physical processes and conscious experiences have absolutely nothing in common whatsoever, then to say they are one and the very same thing is simply an abuse of language (although of course it is still possible one can cause the other, and vice versa).
The truth of the matter is that we have this philosophical problem called the mind/body problem. It's persisted for thousands of years and we are no closer to solving it now in the 21st Century than we have ever been. The proposed materialist solutions are acts of desperation.
The truth is that consciousness exists in its own right. And we cannot perceive anyone else's consciousness, we can only infer it from their bodily behaviour. So consciousness itself is invisible, we only infer its presence in other people via the voluntary movement of their bodies and their speech. When their bodies cease to function at death nothing can be definitively concluded about the consciousness which formerly was able to move that body.
This blog entry by me will also be of interest:
Science, the Afterlife, and the Intelligentsia
Science, the Afterlife, and the Intelligentsia