Nagel: "(…) when we discovered the chemical composition of water, we are dealing with something that is obviously out there in the physical world. When we found out that it is composed of atoms, we are only reducing a physical substance to minor physical parts (…) More to discover that chocolate taste is really just a brain process, we have to analyze something mental (in terms of physical parts), and there is no way that a number of physical brain events are the parties that is made a sensation of taste: a whole can be analyzed in physical physical parts, but not a mental process: the physical parts can not be added to all mental "1 . Although it considered other kinds of examples (ie the theory of gravity), where the application of the phenomenon to describe the macroscopic behavior, Smart but not the ultimate reason for the relationship, nothing prevents the need for further research towards such an understanding. On the contrary, the thesis searliana, saving zeal to banish the idea that mental emergency escapes be something miraculous science, paradoxically seems to impose a kind of epistemological explanatory roof, "where we know that the brain causes mind, but do not understand (or should ask) why. The following are intended to outline a set of practical guidelines designed to better address the problem of the mind. The Pragmatic THE PROBLEM OR HOW TO TRANSFORM PROBLEM IN GUIDELINES FOR ACTION * Balancing the tension between an ontological and theoretical understanding (what is this?) And an instrumentalist-pragmatic (how do).