What’s the difference between the mind and the brain (other than you can lose one, and need to find the other)?
My head I’d be scratchin’ while my thoughts were busy hatchin’.
If I only had a brain.
No idea but welcome to the SDMB. You’ll fit right in.
I think of the mind as the consciousness of the entire organism (including the nerves throughout the body), while the brain is just one organ that contributes to that. That said, I think the brain gives it most of its shape.
If you’re talking about the immaterial soul, whatever that is, I go with Aristotle: the body and the soul are as the wax and the stamp. The soul is the shape of what a person is and does over time. In other words, I think of the soul/mind, insofar as they are immaterial, as the qualitative features of my material self, including changes over time.
The brain is a physiological structure of neurons connected by axions in a matrix of neuroglia material. It provides the biochemical apparatus for central nervous control, stimuli processing and response, information synthesis and retention, and higher cognitive processing. We know quite a bit about the physiological structure of the brain from research of the past century.
The mind is a series of strange loops. Anyone who claims to know more about how the mind really works is either delusional or has one hand on your wallet.
Stranger
The primary difference is that you can only change one of them.
The brain is a physical structure. While alive, there is an electrical-chemical dance that runs through it (and other bits of anatomy).
The mind is the dance.
Or it’s the part of the dance that we’re aware of and/or that influences our actions.
Or it’s that part/those steps that provide us with a sense of self.
Since the mind isn’t a physical thing, different interpretations are not only possible but likely.
There is an area of the brain that maps out our awareness of what is physically us and what is not. There is another that interprets our actions within a map of our character. (Maps are popular these days.)
I’ve heard the mind referred to as an emergent phenomenon.
The brain is hardware; the mind is software.
And zombies don’t eat minds.
(Yes, I know this isn’t a zombie thread, but I couldn’t resist.)
I was going to say that. 
The brain is a glob of neurons sitting inside your head. The mind is an emergent property of those neurons interacting.
Or so I’m told.
I was about to give you a piece of my mind, but never mind; it doesn’t matter.
What is the mind?
No matter.
What is matter?
Never mind.
What is the soul?
That’s immaterial.
Goddamn charlatan. I bought his book like a sucker.
Actually you can train your brain using exercise. So I’d say you can change your brain. You can also nourish or fail to nourish it through proper or improper nutrition.
And thereby, you can change your mind as well.
Actually, despite the title, Pinker essentially admits that we have no real idea how it works and can only describe its functions in qualitative terms.
A few years ago Pinker (I think) wrote an article in which he stated that we’re about as far from real artificial intelligence and creating a synthetic mind as alchemists were from turning lead into gold. I think it is an apt analogy. The more we learn about the physiology of the brain, the more we discover that the complexity of consciousness and cognition is vastly more sophisticated than previously believed.
Stranger
I’ve often heard it said, perhaps originally by Pinker, that “the mind is what the brain does”. That about sums it up.
Your mind is your thoughts, feelings, and experiences, and the connections and relationships between them, considered as a whole.
Your brain is a lump of tissue inside your head.
It is widely believed, and for good reasons, that the brain is somehow responsible for producing the mind (and the individual thoughts, feelings and experiences that constitute it). However, just how a brain produces a mind (or even how it could) is not well understood. There are many theories about this (many of them alluded to as if fact in earlier posts in this thread), but none of them are generally agreed to be satisfactory.
Attempts to define the mind in terms of its relationship to the brain are either naive or intellectually dishonest. It is perfectly possible to have an intimate, and even sophisticated, knowledge of the human mind without even suspecting that has any any particular relationship with the brain whatsoever. Indeed, this was the condition of much of mankind throughout most of human history.
My way was funnier.