Volume 3 · Number 1 · Pages 30–37
Brain in Mind: The Mind–Brain Relation with the Mind at the Center

Herbert F. J. Müller

Log in download the full text in PDF

> Citation > Similar > References > Add Comment


Purpose: To show that the mind–brain relation can be understood from a perspective that keeps the mind at the center. Problem: Since at least the time of Augustine, the puzzle of the mind–brain relation has been how the mind is attached to, or originates from, the body or brain. This is still the prevalent scientific question. It implies assumption of a primary (ontological) subject–object split, and furthermore that subjective experience can be derived from, or even reduced to, a fictitious mind-independently pre-structured reality. This belief in mind-independent reality is closely related to the development and use of language. It in turn means that the mind cannot be real because it cannot be mind-independent and so disappears from discussion, preventing access to the mind–brain question. Solution: The problem requires an epistemology which keeps subjective experience at the center but does not interfere with objective methods. The un-testable proposition of mind-independent structures can be re-formulated as the use of templates for thinking: a method created by humans, a knowable tool, that is, “working” or “as-if” ontology-metaphysics. Truth and reality, including the reality of objective brain activity, then become working tools within ongoing subject-inclusive encompassing experience. Conclusion: The traditional mind–brain puzzle is the result of erroneous premises, and can be replaced by the question: how does working-objective knowledge originate within encompassing experience? This is a novel and contradiction-free approach to studies of the mind–brain relation and related questions.

Key words: mind/brain, zero-derivation structuring, subject/object, working ontology, metaphysics


Müller H. F. J. (2007) Brain in mind: The mind–brain relation with the mind at the center. Constructivist Foundations 3(1): 30–37. http://constructivist.info/3/1/030

Export article citation data: Plain Text · BibTex · EndNote · Reference Manager (RIS)

Similar articles

Müller H. F. J. (2005) People, Tools, and Agency: Who Is the Kybernetes?
Kögler H. (2009) Consciousness as Symbolic Construction: A Semiotics of Thought after Cassirer
Slezak P. (2010) Radical Constructivism: Epistemology, Education and Dynamite
Meierhofer C. (2008) Continuing Discourses. On the References of Mitterer’s Non-dualistic Concept
Vörös S. & Bitbol M. (2017) Enacting Enaction: A Dialectic Between Knowing and Being


Albus J. S. et al. (2007) A proposal for a decade of the mind initiative. Science 317: 1321. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Augustine (Fifth century AD) De civitate dei, XXI, 10. Retrieved from http://phil.flet.keio.ac.jp/person/nakagawa/texts/august/cd/cd21.html on 26 August 2007. (I am indebted to D. Pivnicki for this reference). ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Crick F. (1994) The astonishing hypothesis. The scientific search for the soul. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Feyerabend P. K. (1999) Conquest of abundance. A tale of abstraction versus the richness of being (Edited by Bert Terpstra). University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Gallimard, Paris. Müller H. F. J. (2000) Concept-dynamics and the history of reality, subject, and the encompassing. Target Article 24 in the Karl Jaspers Forum. Retrieved from http://www.kjf.ca/24-TA1.htmon26Aug2007. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Glasersfeld E. von (1991) Knowing without metaphysics: Aspects of the radical constructivist position. In: Steier F. (ed.) Research and reflexivity. Sage, London: 12–29. http://www.vonglasersfeld.com/132
Horvath P. (1997) Jakob von Uexküll. Von Mückensonnen und Umweltröhren. Retrieved from http://members.surfeu.at/patrick.horvath/uex.htm on 30 June 2006. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Jaspers K. (1991) Von der Wahrheit. Piper, Munich. Originally published in 1948. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Merleau-Ponty M. (1981) Phenomenology of perception (Translated by Colin Smith). Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, Henley. French original: Merleau-Ponty M. (1945) Phénoménologie de la perception. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Müller H. F. J. (2005) People, tools, and agency: Who is the kybernetes? Constructivist Foundations 1(1): 35–48. http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/1/1/035.muller
Müller H. F. J. (2007) 0-D rooting of images and superpositions. Retrieved from http://www.kjf.ca/96-C3MUL.htm on 26 August 2007. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Müller H. F. J. (2007) Epistemology returns to its roots. Constructivist Foundations 2(2): 72–80. http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/journal/2/2–3/072.muller
Müller H. F. J. (2007) Jaspers on mind, reality, and communication. Retrieved from http://www.kjf.ca/93-R16BEA.htm on 26 August 2007. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Nagel T. (1986) The view from nowhere. Oxford University Press, Oxford. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Nietzsche F. W. (1994) Der Fall Wagner. Götzen-Dämmerung. Nietzsche contra Wagner (Edited by P. Pütz). Goldmann, Munich. Orginally published 1888–1889. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Piaget J. (1970) L’épistémologie génétique. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Rollins C. D. (1976) Solipsism. In: Edwards P. (ed) Encyclopedia of philosophy, Vol. 7. MacMillan, New York: 487–491. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Vaihinger H. (1922) Die Philosophie des Als Ob, 7th and 8th edition. F. Meiner: Leipzig. Originally published in 1911. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Vico G. (1710) De antiquissima italorum sapientia. Indici e ristampa anastatica (Edited by Giovanni Adamo). Leo S. Olschki: Firenze. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Watzlawick P.(ed.) (1985) Die erfundene Wirklichkeit. Wie wissen wir, was wir zu wissen glauben? Beiträge zum Konstruktivismus. Piper: München & Zürich. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Wittgenstein L. (1922) Tractatus logicophilosophicus. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Wittgenstein L. (1953) Philosophical investigations. Blackwell, Oxford. ▸︎ Google︎ Scholar

Comments: 0

To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.