Mind is the brain?

[little_monkey]

I bring up the question of God because it is at the root of your problem. You want to believe that mind is more than brain activities, that it has some other quality - called immaterial, or spiritual, whatever "flavor of the month" word, and in that belief,  it cannot be observed, and so that leaves you just enough space for you to believe in God, who would be of the same essence of the mind- spiritual, immaterial, whatever.  Your concept of the "mind" is what religious people have called for centuries  the "soul", the non-physical thing that will survive after death. So argue all you want, Benny, but you are fooling yourself by trying relentlessly to deny that mind is just brain activity. Just acknowledge that you want to believe in God. Why all the obfuscation? Come out of the closet, and be honest, not particularly with me, but with yourself.

My concept of mind is that it is the subjective experience of ideas and perceptions: this has nothing to do with any current or traditional view of soul.  I think your strawman is also a bit of an ad hom, but I'm not sure why you are going there.  If this is how you want to communicate, though, I'll choose not to.

I'm trying to have an honest conversation, why would I want to attack you? I have no interest in ad hom. I'm just carrying your words to its logical conclusion. That might be brutal, but better than self-deception in my estimation. 

If you define mind as you have, which is your definition, and many people will take exception with that definition, then you have a concept that has of little use - from my pov. "Subjective" experience can mean anything and nothing at all. Here's what I mean with a single example: Do trees experience love? You can talk about this endlessly without ever coming to a conclusion. Only because it can never be inquired with empirical methods. In my vocabulary, it's called a crackpot theory. And here's my definition of a crackpot theory: if your theory cannot be distinguished from a crackpot theory, then it is a crackpot theory. And what distinguish a good theory which describes the real world from a crackpot theory? A good theory is one that is supported by objective, verifiable evidence. So there you have my theory of crackpot theories. If you ever used this, I insist that you give me credit for it. I have absolute royalty rights on this theory...