I'm torn between two worldviews. One worldview, from neuroscience, stating that the more the brain is damaged, the more the mind slips into nothing/nowhere. Taken to the extreme of brain damage/dissolution/annihilation, one should expect that you're no longer there. Also, from physics describing how particles are arranged in specific/specialized patterns and when the particles disarrange at bodily death we cease to be. The other worldview, that we don't where we came from, where we're going, why or how existence is there, why or how awareness of existence is there, we don't know what is outside of mind and we don't know the nature of personal identity. Thus, who is anyone to proclaim as if they know literally infinity or at least everything that is - what you'd need to conclude that death is for sure oblivion/nonexistence/nonbeing/nothing.

When we die, our brains eventually stop firing. The only place we seem to remain is in our writings, contributions, and the still firing minds of others. 

The conclusions drawn by the scientific method  are independent of one's definition of personal identity.  Therefore science has nothing to say about the truth of mortality or immortality. 

Instead we must instead turn to conceptual analysis, where it  becomes clear , at least to my mind, that whatever one's conclusions are regarding the truth of mortality or immortality, one's conclusions are nothing more than a restatement of one's definition of personal identity.