Where is the problem of “ Where is the mind ? ” ?

We propose that the discussions about “where the mind is” depend directly on the metaphysical preconception and definition of “mind”. If we see the mind from one perspective (individualist), it will be only in the brain, and if we see it from another (active externalist), it will be embedded in the body and extended into the world. The “whereabouts” of the mind depends on our of mind. Therefore, we should not ask if the mind is somewhere, but if it is somehow. Many people, such as Clark (1997) and Chalmers (1998), Haugeland (1995), Maturana and Varela (1987), Chiel and Beer (1997), have defended that the mind and cognition is not only in the brain, but it extends to the body and the environment. They can be considered “active externalists”. On the other hand, we could name “individualists”, such as Butler (1998), Adams and Aizawa (2001), who have argued that the mind is only in the brain, even when it is strongly related with the body and environment. There is no discussion about the relevance of studying the brain, body, and world in order to understand the mind. The disagreement lies only on is the mind. But they all think that they speak about the same thing, just because they use the same word to describe it. When we look more closely, they really mean different things with their use of the word “mind”.