"This is the end Beautiful friend." the mind-self-soul vs. the brain and non-existence

This is the end,
Beautiful friend
This is the end,
My only friend
The end

Of our elaborate plans
The end, 

of everything that stands
The end, 

no safety or surprise
The end, 

I'll never look into your eyes again

Can you picture what will be?
So limitless and free
Desperately in need of some stranger's hand
In a desperate land

-- "The End" by "The Doors"

“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual, as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description.”

― Albert Einstein

DRAFT: I think I sorted out my mechanical confusion mixing up where, in my haste of thought, I mixed up the word "brain" vs. "mind" to an exceedingly confusing level, not only in my headspace, but is also exceedingly important, if not the entire point, to the arguments below...

"This is the end, Beautiful friend."

The metaphysical 

"mind-self-soul"

vs. 

The physical "brain" 

and the "illusion of consciousness"

There are two completely different forms of "Dualism." One philosophy and the brain vs. the metaphysical mind (argued here.) 

The second is a related but more spiritual  subject/argument about "religious Dualism" where the argument here: the physical/natural (accidental and coincidental) world of the atheists, and the Metaphysical spiritual religious beliefs of the spiritualists (or theists) that define both God and the Human Soul, as you can see at first the arguments are very similar, almost identical. 

But fundamentally "religious dualism" is the belief in two distinct but equal Gods, most often described as a God of Light and a God of Darkness, almost the mirror images of each other. The symbol of the Yin Yang is one of the greatest visual representations of this ever put to paper (this subject of the two gods and their differences (and similarities) is not discussed in this post.)

I should also reiterate my belief among most of my philosophical, physical, metaphysical, and spiritualism; I do not believe in a supernatural "good" or "evil." I believe good and evil are human constructs and are most often the results of "errors" with in the physical and psychological aspects of a human brain.

Anything approaching a "supernatural evil" would be if you believed in "human ghosts" who still retain this conflict but give in to the evil. 

Angels of Light and Dark Angels are not bound by such simplistic concepts as human good and human evil. They are more akin to holy good, holy light, vs. (or better, put up against) unholy "evil" unholy "darkness." (a complex subject not delved into here.) further drafts upon this subject can be found within the entire blog scattered and described a bit haphazardly still, like this post, in mostly "draft" form.

They represent, not necessarily "completely different" ideas, but are both approached and argued in differing ways: 

1) a philosophical physiological "physical brain" otherwise defined as the corporal illusion of a mind 

vs. 

2) a "meta-physical incorporeal mind" which transcends Matter and Energy.

The subject called (3) would be the religious aspect of the dualism which will NOT be argued here. It includes an infinite "God of Light" and (not versus) an infinite "God of Darkness." Where "supernatural evil" as described by just about every person and religion on the face of our planet, is not actually "supernatural" at all. 

"Evil" is a physiological, electro-chemical energy created solely in the physical "brain" of the physical Human Being. Independent of some "Evil Force" perpetrated by "Devils and Demons" and the "unholy trinity" of: Satan (God) Leviathan (the holy spirit) and the Prince of Darkness (sometimes called the "anti-Christ") who obviously is the mirror image of the Christian "Christ."

These two are seen more as harmonious mirror opposites than as violent warring deities.

The other argument, not pursued here but (mentioned in other posts below this debate) is a "religious" belief in which there are two equal but opposites "Gods." 

A mirror image of each other: Light and Dark. Yin and Yang. The "real world" of Matter and Energy vs. a "metaphysical or spiritual" existence beyond what we call the "real world."

Although the following proposition can and does involve the metaphysical, supernatural, and religious; I solely define, without exception, that "good" and "evil" in this debate are firmly human constructs. Created by humans, thought up in their physical brains and carried out with their "physical bodies. 

All Perpetrated by humans. 

Which brings up a new point that if "good" and "evil" were created by humankind, and there exists "only" a physical brain. Then, to a dualistic spiritualist those atheists who believe only in the human brain, only in a physical world, and only in one brief life, are then saddled with the concept of good and evil and all the weight the subject carries. 

I believe good and evil are the physical idea of brain matter and it's illusion of consciousness. Completely separate from the metaphysical spiritual idea of a "mind". 

I fundamentally believe in a mind beyond the brain. A self, which is the exact same thing as a soul, all of which rise above and beyond human physical "good" and "evil" and I dismiss it as the brutality of the human brain vs. the order and superiority of the human mind. a.k.a. the mind-self-soul.

1) This would be the argument between the idea that what we see ourselves as, simply a material computer-like brain, OR the illusion of a mind  independent of, or at least arisen from (created by) the brain which acts only as a vessel for the pure illusion of a mind-self-soul. 

Those who argue for the brain believe that self-consciousness is an illusion, a "ghost in the machine" which has taken on the idea that mind-self is just a side-effect of the physical brain and it's electric and chemical actions and reactions that tell our soulless physical bodies what to do and when.

In other words: we are all just bio-machines and the "idea of self" is a side effect of a complex brain which was fundamentally designed to avoid danger from: animals, enemy tribes. To gather food or hunt for it. Have sex and so have children who become the physical reality of what we would call a young brain on which to pass all we know in hope that they can do better than us. 

And so it follows that when we die, we will just shut off, like turning off a lightbulb. And if this is the ultimate finality of the human brain, then what did anything really matter at all. You won't be there to see your offspring and family line. You won't be there to see the invention and marvels of humankind. The physical-brain argument sucks, it's sad, depressing, despairing. The complete and utter cessation of all consciousness.

It is the safe and unimaginative argument because of the idea that the brain is just another tool at the disposal of a physical body and natural world plain and simple, with over simplification, ignorant, and sad.

2) mind-self-soul argument:

2) The argument for this side is that we do have a real existence, which is indeed "connected" to the physical brain, and even "acted upon" by the human brain; but it's independent of the biomechanical machine that the meta-physicists believe is our soul pre-programed computer: the physical brain. 

And, on the flip side. Obviously, the second version invites the supernatural aspect of humans, that the mind, which is the "self" which can be called a "soul" (from here on mostly referred to as the mind-self-soul) is not the product of a physical brain acting on and reacting to external stimuli only, not that the human brain is simply and only the most complex brain in all of nature, but is in fact something that is both "physical" and "real," not just an illusion. A real physical-energy illusion of consciousness, NOT the illusion of a super-brain mind-self-soul consciousness which survives death, and existed before birth. 

back to 1) again: 

To the atheistic physical brain proponents, the brain is just a computer. And anything that appears to be a mind-self-soul is nothing more than a side product in the form of a program on this brain-computer.

You can dissect, weigh, measure, scan, and surgically operate on the brain, but you'll never find a mind (or a mind-self-soul) in all that physical architecture. Only ever a brain. 

back to 2 ) again:

2) But this is all proven simplistic and incorrect by the fact that we are aware of our "selves" and so are beyond and more than our "brain." There is, thus far, no "logical" proof (other than faith and visions and dreams and unexplainable phenomena) to suggest something beyond the physical. But to those who believe in the mind-self-soul there is an infinity of existence. And most proponents have had a metaphysical or spiritual experience.

back again to 1 ) again:

And the first, obviously (or not) invites the idea that humans and the universe are all only physical elements constantly undergoing change. And through the complex processes in the parts of our brain which are extraneous i.e. mostly unnecessary to survive in the physical world, we can see that we, as brains, do not exist, there is no "self" and there is no metaphysical "mind" there is only the physical "brain" and the illusion that there is anything more than a physical electro-chemical brain machine.

Thus atheists believe you didn't exist before your life, and you won't exist after. You only exist this one infinitesimal time and then enter into oblivion, the complete and utter cessation of all existence. 

If that is true, then there is no proof for or of anything at all. Nothing etched in stone or scribbled on paper; which says we ever even existed at all. The Universe was formed, the galaxies the solar systems, the suns and their planets, they all existed before the earth and its myriad creatures and ultimately, us. 

And when the sun burns out and our solar system explodes with the supernova of our dying sun, there will forever be wiped from all existence any proof we ever existed. 

But if you didn't exist "before," you existed, and you didn't exist "after" you existed; you are surrounded on both ends by "nothing" and so nothing then something then nothing can only ultimately equal and be swallowed up by, nothing. 

After the ultimate mass-extinction event, no court in high heaven or holy hell can prove you ever existed at all. Not even a flash in the almost eternal slow blink of a god. You were always just nothing ever and forever. Some physical brains can accept this, only one life, then oblivion. But if that is so, then you never existed to begin with. You aren't a physical brain, and not even a ghost.

So, why would Auschwitz matter, why would Democracy matter. Why would terrorists in a sea of innocent humans matter, and why would mass murder and genocide in the name of "protection" matter, anything, at all, ever, whatsoever. Nothing matters, nothing. Because it all was only ever, before and after, nothing, and it all will be nothing. So why even give a shit about what is happening, because it didn't exist before, and it won't exist after, 

so "fuck it" right? Nothing really matters:

"This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang, but a whimper." 

(--T.S. Elliot)

1) 

(The "Devil's Advocate" or "Satan" which simply meant the substitution of who would argue against Jobe to God. Satan originally meaning "adversary" in an non-supernatural way. the prosecution, or, eventually, the turncoat. Benedict Arnold became a "satan" (small "s") to the colonial armies. 

(and so the devils advocate [i.e. not me] says:

I say fuck the "real world" because the real world is a temporary, barely a blink of the eternal eye, illusion. Matter and energy and the exchange between are simple constructs of a vast supernatural existence wherein the mind, the self, the soul exist external to, and outside of, a physical world. The mud, the dust, the wind; all of that is temporary and meaningless. It is the supernatural world, the world of "minds" and "selves" and "souls" that is eternal, beyond death, before birth. 

Otherwise be kind, or be cruel. In the end it just doesn't matter. No eternal courts. No infinity of news stories or documentaries. Just an eternal sea of nothing. Not even a sea, not even eternal, just not...

2) 

The argument for the defense of the mind-self-soul takes the court room and argues:

However! Since I am self-aware, since I know I do exist, since I experience my mind and know it exists. Since "I think, therefore I am." Then everything matters. Good or evil, cruelty or kindness. The death of your parents and the birth of your children. It all maters. Why, because we are eternal beings, and we never turn off into blackness like the flick of a light switch. There is "no" nothing. Only existence for eternity.

mind-self-soul

2)

And so, instead of nothing mattering. Instead of everything sparking then fading and never have existed at all, we do exist before all, at all, after all. And so what we say and do "does" matter. Auschwitz "does" require punishment and historical reference. Democracy is worth fighting for.

(Pro metaphysical spiritual)

The following info was found on an initial internet search compiled by their Ai programs:

Albert Einstein's religious and philosophical views: "I believe in Spinoza's God" as opposed to personal God concerned with individuals, a view which he thought naïve. 

Einstein rejected a conflict between science and religion, and held that cosmic religion was necessary for science. "I am not an atheist".

Nietzsche derided rational proofs of God's non-existence:

"They have no force; they are boring. The death of God is an historic fact being realized in western culture;" 

"it is the destruction—the self-destruction—of the foundation for human goodness, beauty and truth.""Faith is not the belief that God will do what you want. It is the belief that God will do what is right." -Max Lucado

BONUS MATERIAL:

Upon the "choice" in the "afterlife" (religious)

by James Douglas Morrison.

"Death makes angels of us all and gives us wings where we had shoulders Smooth as raven's claws."

"No more money, no more fancy dress

This other kingdom seems by far the best

Until its other jaw reveals incest

And lose obedience to a vegetable law

I will not go

I prefer a feast of friends to the giant family."

(in my interpretation, an argument for Hades (not hell, don't believe in that) which it is your choice to remain as your mind-self-soul hanging on to your current personality instead of giving that up for a higher existence, "the giant family" is the higher. 

The "feast of friends" is the lesser path of self existence beyond death.

(see below and after: Hades: not Hell, more akin to "Limbo." vs. Heaven where the soul gives up it's "self" and becomes one with the "light and love" of the God of Heaven.)