But the concept of my entire existence and my awareness of my existence can't be explained in terms of molecular activity alone. Atomic particles react, they do not perceive, and I am much more than the consequence of material reactions, because no matter how, when or why the material reacts, it remains material - just as it was before the reaction.
You seem to use the word 'reaction' as a simple catch all word, when what you seem to be talking about is 'interaction', a word which is much more applicable to what happens to sub atomic particles, to atomic particles and indeed to molecules in all sorts of situations.
Atoms and molecules follow the rules of chemistry and physics, even when they're part of a complex, living, breathing being. If you learned in chemistry that some atoms tend to gain or lose electrons or form bonds with each other, those facts remain true even when the atoms or molecules are part of a living thing. In fact, simple interactions between atoms—played out many times and in many different combinations, in a single cell or a larger organism—are what make life possible. One could argue that everything you are, including your consciousness, is the byproduct of chemical and electrical interactions between a very, very large number of nonliving atoms!
https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/chemistry--of-life/elements-and-atoms/a/matter-elements-atoms-articleThe fact that you don't agree with this is neither here nor there. What you cannot say with any sense of vindication at all is that 'awareness of my existence can't be explained in terms of molecular activity alone.' because 1) there is no way you can establish that your view is the correct one 2)others who have studied and have expertise in the subject disagree with you. That doesn't mean to say that you are wrong, of course, But, what it does suggest is that your view is pure speculation.
Here are another couple of sites which use the word 'interaction', one with regard to the strong and weak nuclear forces, and the other is simply illustrating that the interaction of certain atoms can produce water molecules, and that these molecules can interact with other molecules to form other liquids. It also uses the word 'reaction' in its proper context.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong_interactionhttp://www.open.edu/openlearn/science-maths-technology/science/chemistry/how-do-molecules-interactAt least, if you actually started to use the word 'interaction' in its proper setting, I might have a little more respect for your understanding of the whole subject.
So far you simply come over as someone who refuses to acknowledge any other view but your own, and that view is simply predicated on your absolute conviction in your faith. It seems to lead to your propensity for simply ignoring questions put to you if you find them too difficult to answer and blithely repeating the same assertions, seemingly ad infintum. What this seems to create is a sense of exasperation in many of the replies because you are not willing or able to engage in debate. I, for one, would wish that you might produce actual arguments/evidence which would support your point of view.
