Repository | Book | Chapter

When someone tries to clarify what the mind-brain relationship is, it is very important to use the basic term because ultimately, the man's vision underlies the neuroscientific proposal with which we are working and also the range of potentials and limitations of research. The term "correlation" is widely used when we talk about the relationship between neural activity and mind or consciousness. The aim of this paper is precisely to show the real scope of the term in this field. The beginning will be that the term "correlation" can mean, in this context, the existence of a causal-efficient relationship or of a psychophysical parallelism or of a terminological dualism – but not real – in the way of two conceptual systems, etc. However, it can also be studied by analyzing other levels. This will make it possible to assess the appropriateness of the term "correlation." Following this line, the mind-brain relationship can be approached from an "causal analysis' not merely efficient or from the concept of "possibility condition" of an event and even from "reason enough." The core of the chapter studies the difference between "causality" and "condition of possibility," the scope of each concept, and the explanation that both perspectives are epistemically compatible. The origin of these terms – Aristotelian and rationalist – will help achieve this goal. It is concluded that the metaphysical and constitutive understanding proceeds from causal explanation, whereas in the explanation of events as results, but not in their nature or existence, "correlation" means "condition of possibility."

DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-95360-1_7

Full citation: