Programming the Human Mind:

[I_am_not_mafia]

It may be that mind is of the brain, and only of the brain.  And that, after all, is what the OP is about.  If you want to prove that there is no mind separate from the brain, then welcome to the end of this thread.

First define what a mind is. You are the one suggesting that one exists and is separate from the brain. The burden of proof is on you.

Two words you may want to look up though:

Emergent phenomena.

Not a problem at all. It just means that I just end up ignoring the whole issue of qualia and not missing out in the slightest. You're the one who brought it up. Not me.

If you want to define that which is subjective purely in terms of that which is objective, then you are welcome to.  You are also welcome to define black as white.

So you are effectively saying that anything that is subjective is not measurable. That is not scientific and is therefore woo. I shall ignore the rest of the vague  word salad laden with baggage and unfounded assumptions.

[bennyboy]

It may be that mind is of the brain, and only of the brain.  And that, after all, is what the OP is about.  If you want to prove that there is no mind separate from the brain, then welcome to the end of this thread.

First define what a mind is. You are the one suggesting that one exists and is separate from the brain. The burden of proof is on you.

Two words you may want to look up though:

Emergent phenomena.

I exactly haven't insisted that. You've made plenty of positive assertions, I've only given labels we use for mental experiences, and cast doubts on whether a machine could reproduce them.

Are we playing the vocabulary game? Okay, how about "supervenient properties" or "pragmatic assumptions"? "Condescending pedantry" maybe?

If you want to define that which is subjective purely in terms of that which is objective, then you are welcome to.  You are also welcome to define black as white.

So you are effectively saying that anything that is subjective is not measurable. That is not scientific and is therefore woo. I shall ignore the rest of the vague  word salad laden with baggage and unfounded assumptions.

You are struggling with the difference between labels and definitions. "Mind" is whatever happens when I wake up, stretch my arms, put my bunny slippers on, and start experiencing my day. That's not a definition-- it's a word used to reference an experience common to members of the human species.

If you doubt the existence of the subjective, then you must think these words appeared on the internet by magic, so woo on you. If you do not doubt the existence of the subjective, then go ahead and hook me up to your Mind-o-meter 3000 and tell me what it is like for me to taste pineapple. How would YOU go about measuring the experience of pineapple-ness?

As for assumptions-- again, show me any assumption I've made. I've explicitly said that it may be that mind is brain function, and that until it can be established what ABOUT the brain allows the existence of qualia, then I'd doubt whether any machine, no matter how well it was programmed, could reproduce the Human Mind, a la the OP.