I'm an organism run by a self-aware neural network.
I have neural processes for accomplishing various perceptive, linguistic, cognitive, intentional, meaningful tasks, such as answering "What color is that flower?" or "Who are you?"
I'm a mammal. We mammals are the best. On land, we're the smartest, the fastest, the biggest, and the most fearsome. In the ocean, we're the smartest, the biggest, and the most fearsome. At any distance over a sprint, I bet we swim faster than any fish. In the air, . . . OK, in the air the birds have us beat, but they only fly because they're afraid of us mammals. When the birds get to some island that we haven't found yet, they give up flying and stick to the ground. Then we show up later after they've forgotten how to fly and we eat them. Stupid birds.
But are you the organism or the organism's mind?
That question presupposes an essential "I" that is to be identified with either the organism or the mind. There is the organism. There is its mind. But there is not also and additionally an "I" to be identified with either of these things.
The utility of 1st- and 2nd-person grammar does not demonstrate that the grammar corresponds to ultimate reality.
What are you not?
I'm not ghostly, eternal soul temporarily possessing (or imagining it possesses) a physical body.
Jehova's Clones, a related rant