Matt McCormick wrote, “Cotard’s syndrome, or the delusional belief that you are dead, that you don’t exist, or that you have lost your organs or blood, results from damage to the channels of interaction between the fusiform face area and the limbic system.” What can Creator tell us about this? Are the researchers over-attributing causality to the brain damage alone? Would the same symptoms and delusions inevitably result in any person that suffered similar brain damage?

This is a perceptive question because, in fact, there would be a variety of presentations, and that is already inherent within your question. Belief you are dead is quite different than believing you have simply lost organs or blood; all have to do with some kind of loss of bodily makeup, along with no conscious awareness of how illogical the thought might be, that the thought truly adds. For someone to believe they are dead and tell you this, flies in the face of basic logic, but not to them. So here what is taking place is another clue, in fact, the consciousness has a life and an origin, and an agenda of its own that arises somewhere beyond the break, and when the brain is perturbed some of the signal gets lost and what remains is fragmentary, and may even be illogical or counterintuitive to other perceptions and certainly, in this example, basic common sense. So that lost content is clearly important for normal functioning, and in its absence leaves a person in a fragmentary state, and again this does not speak to whether the part that is missing originates originally in that particular area of the brain that is assumed to be faulty, or is simply not being perceived and added to all that is simply assumed to originate in that brain location, when such is not the case. Here again, the variety of things that can happen illustrate what gets through can be variable and may depend on workings of the mind and its consciousness that are going on in other working parts of the brain, and being perceived but lacking important portions to truly make sense of it. One person's experience may well differ from another's in the same way that television programming changes over time, so what you receive on a television set one day might be different the next—that does not prove that the television set is creative, it only provides a set of observations in want of a deeper way to probe things to find where the signal is truly coming from and how that comes about in the creation.