BW ******************
Since you ask, and I'm so friendly and cooperative, I will say a few words about what mind is. (PLEASE don't come back and say that such a thing needs a material substrate. I'll just deny it, and ask you to demonstrate it. You have access to only one mind, which seems to you to be embodied; but that's no assurance that all (or any) minds are embodied.)
BW ******************
The reasonable claim is that the ¹brain (or mind) is a computer with hardware and software that we don't understand yet. When we understand both, we'll build one just like it. This would be totally consistent with 10,000 years of technological advances, all of which are based on material things, and none of which are not. This is my position. It doesn't rely on "the immaterial", whatever that is.
Your claim requires that something exists that can't be proven (that the mind is an immaterial object). This is a ²religious claim. You either believe arguments for it, or you don't, no amount of words will prove your belief. You have made the outrageous claim, it is incumbent upon you to prove it. But you can't. We both have beliefs about the brain we can't prove, however your position is inconsistent with scientific history and has no analogous precedent (requiring the existence of something "immaterial"?).
I suspected that again we were going to reach a foundational impasse. I think that may be where we are now.
¹ "mind" is what we call what the "brain" does with its hardware and software
² by pointing this out, I am not intending to be insulting as it was perceived last time
---Al
