ArticleFrontiers in computational neuroscience2021
Mind Causality: A Computational Neuroscience Approach.
Article in Frontiers in computational neuroscience, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- How to Foster Challenging Interdisciplinary Collaborations: Can Philosophy Support Neuroscientists?The European journal of neuroscience · 2026Review
- Traffic State Lane-Level Estimation Based on Transformer and Vehicle Trajectory Data.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- No effect of preliminarily simulated cathodal HD-tDCS on the frontopolar cortex in the exploration-exploitation task.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Emotion, Motivation, Reasoning, and How Their Brain Systems Are Related.Brain sciences · 2025Review
- A Critical Perspective on the (Neuro)biological Foundations of Language and Linguistic Cognition.Integrative psychological & behavioral science · 2024Review
- Anatomy of the auditory cortex then and now.The Journal of comparative neurology · 2023Review
- Emotion, motivation, decision-making, the orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex, and the amygdala.Brain structure & function · 2023Review
- Auditory cortical connectivity in humans.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2023Article
- The human posterior cingulate, retrosplenial, and medial parietal cortex effective connectome, and implications for memory and navigation.Human brain mapping · 2023Article
- Time Is of the Essence: Neural Codes, Synchronies, Oscillations, Architectures.Frontiers in computational neuroscience · 2022Article
- Inattentive Perception, Time, and the Incomprehensibility of Consciousness.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A neuroscience-based approach has recently been proposed for the relation between the mind and the brain. The proposal is that events at the sub-neuronal, neuronal, and neuronal network levels take place simultaneously to perform a computation that can be described at a high level as a mental state, with content about the world. It is argued that as the processes at the different levels of explanation take place at the same time, they are linked by a non-causal supervenient relationship: causality can best be described in brains as operating within but not between levels. This mind-brain theory allows mental events to be different in kind from the mechanistic events that underlie them; but does not lead one to argue that mental events cause brain events, or vice versa: they are different levels of explanation of the operation of the computational system. Here, some implications are developed. It is proposed that causality, at least as it applies to the brain, should satisfy three conditions. First, interventionist tests for causality must be satisfied. Second, the causally related events should be at the same level of explanation. Third, a temporal order condition must be satisfied, with a suitable time scale in the order of 10 ms (to exclude application to quantum physics; and a cause cannot follow an effect). Next, although it may be useful for different purposes to describe causality involving the mind and brain at the mental level, or at the brain level, it is argued that the brain level may sometimes be more accurate, for sometimes causal accounts at the mental level may arise from confabulation by the mentalee, whereas understanding exactly what computations have occurred in the brain that result in a choice or action will provide the correct causal account for why a choice or action was made. Next, it is argued that possible cases of "downward causation" can be accounted for by a within-levels-of-explanation account of causality. This computational neuroscience approach provides an opportunity to proceed beyond Cartesian dualism and physical reductionism in considering the relations between the mind and the brain.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.