Mind = Brain?

[theVOID]

This is a far cry from having explained anything that resembles the question stated. It reminds me of the cartoon of two professors at the chalk board full with formulas and somewhere in the middle the note "and then a miracle happens", I'm sure you know the one. Also, I did ask you to explain it to me, not to redirect me to other internet sources.

If you disagree with the aforementioned then do you want to explain how a non-physical (non brain) process is supposed to do mathematics? What does it use as variables if not electrical signals?

I do not necessarily disagree with the aforementioned, but I do disagree that it is anything near an 'explanation'. Also questioning a statement of yours is not the same as claiming the opposite of that statement. So there is no obligation for me whatsoever to reason in favour of that. You have made the assertion, the burden of proof is on you. You showed yourself quite confident in your opening post about your ability in explaning this but it seems to me right now that your words don't quite match with what's under the hood.

But cheer up, there is some consolation for you in the fact that no one as of yet has been able to do what you suggested you can do. We are only just understanding some basic things of the brain, the gap between neurons firing and first person awareness of mathematical concepts however hasn't been bridged at all.

I know you asked me to explain it but, like i said, I'm not well versed in neurology, but your analogy of the cartoon professors was completely inaccurate as i did not simply say "it just happened", i explained that i don't know a whole lot about Neurology and then offered my simple understanding of how mathematics is possible / takes place in the mind/brain along with some articles i had bookmarked which i thought would be able to answer your question better. I'm fully aware that the Brain is one of the single most complicated areas of study imaginable and we are only at the very beginning of our ventures into understanding it.

As for why i feel confident with my position:

I consider the mind being an abstract of the physical brain the most likely scenario due largely to occams Razor, that being the mind brain relationship does not require an assumption where as the opposing position requires the introduction of a separate state of reality (supernatural) in which a process of mind could take place. So this is a case of choosing the conclusion that requires the least number of assumptions and not one based on any empirical certainty, though even empirically the absence of evidence for anything supernatural as opposed to the evidence for mind/brain correlation lends strong credence to the latter and none to the former.

And if you are looking for someone to pick over neurology with then might i suggest taking it up with someone more knowledgeable in the area - i'm not equipped to argue on the subject - but if you can find someone here who's up to it it'd be cool to follow the arguments for and against and gain a little context over the disagreement.