There are no proofs outside pure mathematics; science works based on justifiable beliefs. Absence of evidence is evidence of absence; we don't need to prove unicorns don't exist to ignore their potential existence in our model of the universe. The null hypothesis is that brains are not magic.

I disagree, though not with absolute confidence. Incidentally, i love how fast AI discussion degrade into existentialism.

Even if minds need unknown 'laws' emerging from dualistic nature of existence, they still exist.

Whether we are human beings in a world that is as it seems, characters in an RPG game, brains in a vat, souls tortured by a demon, artificial minds somewhere in a cascade of simulations or dreaming Hindu gods, we are (or rather I am) still minds under the des cartes definition of a mind and that mind exists.

As for not confusing proof with belief… Occams razor has value. Even if the religious view of souls or such is possible, it is not based on any knowledge or information. It's made up. It has a kind of a longshot chance of being correct in the same way early philosophical claims that matter is made up of wind, fire, earth and water were had a longshot chance of being correct.

In any case, minds seem to have a lot to do with brains and brains are nice squishy physical things that can be prodded and examined and haven't yet been seen to do stuff that is impossible in a material universe.