Theory of Mind. (Cognitive)

IN THE NAME OF ALLAH – THE SOURCE OF MERCY – THE MOST MERCIFUL

THE PHRASE "THEORY OF MIND" HAS MORE COMMONLY BEEN USED TO REFER TO A SPECIFIC COGNITIVE CAPACITY. THE ABILITY TO UNDERSTAND THAT OTHERS HAVE BELIEFS, DESIRES AND INTENTIONS THAT ARE DIFFERENT FROM ONE'S OWN. IN PHILOSOPHY, IT REFERS TO THE LARGE AREA OF PHILOSOPHY RELATING TO MIND OR TO PARTICULAR THEORIES ABOUT WHAT MIND IS. 

IN FUNCTIONALIST THEORIES, THE COMPUTATIONAL THEORIES OF MIND THAT ARE INDEPENDENT OF THE PHYSICAL INSTANTIATION OF ANY PARTICULAR MIND.

IN BRAIN-MIND IDENTITY THEORIES, BIOLOGISTS ARE CONCERNED WITH THE DETAILS OF HOW BRAIN ACTIVITY PRODUCES MIND AND WORK WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE IDENTITY THEORY OF MIND

IN DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY, THEORY OF MIND IS A BASIC UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE MIND WORKS AND HOW IT INFLUENCES BEHAVIOUR.

"THEORY OF MIND" INTERPERSONAL UNDERSTANDING OF MENTAL STATES.

THIS THEORY OF MIND COVERS TWO SEPARATE CONCEPTS:

GAINING THE UNDERSTANDING THAT OTHERS ALSO HAVE MINDS, WITH DIFFERENT AND SEPARATE BELIEFS, DESIRES, MENTAL STATES, AND INTENTIONS. BEING ABLE TO FORM OPERATIONAL HYPOTHESES (THEORIES), OR MENTAL MODELS, WITH A DEGREE OF ACCURACY, AS TO WHAT THOSE BELIEFS, DESIRES, MENTAL STATES AND INTENTIONS ARE. 

A THEORY OF MIND APPEARS TO BE A USUALLY INNATE POTENTIAL ABILITY IN HUMANS AND SOME ARGUE, IN CERTAIN OTHER SPECIES, BUT ONE REQUIRING SOCIAL AND OTHER EXPERIENCE OVER MANY YEARS TO BRING SUCCESSFULLY TO ADULT FRUITION. IT IS PROBABLY A CONTINUUM, IN THE SENSE THAT DIFFERENT PEOPLE MAY DEVELOP MORE, OR LESS, EFFECTIVE THEORIES OF MIND, VARYING FROM VERY COMPLETE AND ACCURATE ONES, THROUGH TO MINIMALLY FUNCTIONAL. IT IS OFTEN IMPLIED OR ASSUMED (BUT NOT STATED EXPLICITLY) THAT THIS DOES NOT MERELY SIGNIFY CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING. OTHER PEOPLE HAVE MINDS AND THINK, BUT ALSO SOME KIND OF UNDERSTANDING AND WORKING MODEL THAT THESE THOUGHTS AND STATES AND EMOTIONS ARE REAL AND GENUINE. EMPATHY IS A RELATED CONCEPT, MEANING EXPERIENTIALLY RECOGNISING AND UNDERSTANDING THE STATES OF MIND, INCLUDING BELIEFS, DESIRES AND PARTICULARLY EMOTIONS OF OTHERS WITHOUT INJECTING YOUR OWN, OFTEN CHARACTERISED AS THE ABILITY TO "PUT ONESELF INTO ANOTHER'S SHOES". CHILDREN ARE SUPPOSED TO DEVELOP 'THEORY OF THE MIND' AT AROUND 4 YEARS OF AGE.

EACH OF US KNOWS BY INTROSPECTION THAT WE HAVE BELIEFS, DESIRES AND INTENTIONS AND WE INFER BY EXTENSION AND BY USING OUR OWN SELF-DEVELOPED THEORY OF MIND. THAT ALL OTHER HUMANS WITH NORMAL MINDS ALSO SHARE THIS COGNITIVE ABILITY AND USUALLY HAVE THOUGHTS AND FEELINGS WHICH WE DISCOVER IN FACT DIFFER FROM OUR OWN. RESEARCHERS WHO HAVE SPENT A GREAT DEAL OF TIME WITH NON-HUMAN APES TEND TO ACCEPT THE LIKELIHOOD THAT OTHER APES LIKE CHIMPS ALSO HAVE A THEORY OF MIND.

THERE IS INTEREST IN THE IDEA THAT CERTAIN LEARNED BEHAVIOURS, SUCH AS HUMAN LANGUAGE BEHAVIOUR, FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A THEORY OF MIND IN BOTH HUMANS AND CHIMPS. THERE HAS ALSO BEEN SPECULATION THAT CERTAIN HUMANS FAIL TO PROGRESS THROUGH THE NORMAL COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES THAT LEAD TO ACQUISITION OF A THEORY OF MIND.

DOES THE AUTISTIC CHILD HAVE A "THEORY OF MIND"? IN WHICH IT WAS SUGGESTED THAT THE HUMAN BRAIN NORMALLY HAS A "THEORY OF MIND MODULE" AND THAT THIS PARTICULAR COMPONENT OF THE BRAIN MAY NOT DEVELOP NORMALLY IN SOME PEOPLE. WITH THE ADVENT OF NEUROIMAGING TECHNIQUES, PARTICULAR BRAIN REGIONS THAT SEEM TO BE IMPORTANT FOR THEORY OF MIND HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED. FURTHER AUTISM RESEARCH CASTS LIGHT ON THE CRUCIAL STAGES OF INFANT DEVELOPMENT.

MIND REFERS TO THE COLLECTIVE ASPECTS OF INTELLECT AND CONSCIOUSNESS WHICH ARE MANIFEST IN SOME COMBINATION OF THOUGHT, PERCEPTION, EMOTION, WILL, MEMORY AND IMAGINATION. THE MIND IS THE RESULT OF THE ACTIVITY OF THE BRAIN. MODERN TECHNOLOGY CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHICH PORTIONS OF THE BRAIN ARE MORE FUNCTIONAL IN RELATIONSHIP TO CERTAIN THOUGHTS, IE, THE MIND. THERE ARE MANY THEORIES OF WHAT THE MIND IS AND HOW IT WORKS, DATING BACK TO GREEK PHILOSOPHERS. MODERN THEORIES, BASED ON A SCIENTIFIC UNDERSTANDING OF THE BRAIN, SHOW THE MIND AS A PHENOMENON OF PSYCHOLOGY AND THE TERM IS OFTEN USED MORE OR LESS SYNONYMOUSLY WITH CONSCIOUSNESS.

THE QUESTION OF WHICH HUMAN ATTRIBUTES MAKE UP THE MIND IS ALSO MUCH DEBATED. SOME ARGUE THAT ONLY THE "HIGHER" INTELLECTUAL FUNCTIONS CONSTITUTE MIND, PARTICULARLY REASON AND MEMORY. IN THIS VIEW THE EMOTIONS, LOVE, HATE, FEAR, JOY ARE MORE "PRIMITIVE" OR SUBJECTIVE IN NATURE AND SHOULD BE SEEN AS DIFFERENT IN NATURE OR ORIGIN TO THE MIND. OTHERS ARGUE THAT THE RATIONAL AND THE EMOTIONAL SIDES OF THE HUMAN PERSON CANNOT BE SEPARATED, THAT THEY ARE OF THE SAME NATURE AND ORIGIN, AND THAT THEY SHOULD ALL BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE INDIVIDUAL MIND.

IN POPULAR USAGE MIND IS FREQUENTLY SYNONYMOUS WITH THOUGHT. IT IS THAT PRIVATE CONVERSATION WITH OURSELVES THAT WE CARRY ON "INSIDE OUR HEADS" DURING EVERY WAKING MOMENT OF OUR LIVES. THUS WE "MAKE UP OUR MINDS," "CHANGE OUR MINDS" OR ARE "OF TWO MINDS" ABOUT SOMETHING. ONE OF THE KEY ATTRIBUTES OF THE MIND IN THIS SENSE IS THAT IT IS A PRIVATE SPHERE. NO HUMAN CAN "KNOW OUR MIND." THEY CAN ONLY KNOW WHAT WE COMMUNICATE.

BOTH PHILOSOPHERS AND PSYCHOLOGISTS REMAIN DIVIDED ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE MIND. SOME TAKE WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE SUBSTANTIAL VIEW AND ARGUE THAT THE MIND IS A SINGLE ENTITY, PERHAPS HAVING ITS BASE IN THE BRAIN BUT DISTINCT FROM IT AND HAVING AN AUTONOMOUS EXISTENCE. 

FUNCTIONALISTS TEND TO ARGUE THAT THE ATTRIBUTES WHICH WE COLLECTIVELY CALL THE MIND ARE CLOSELY RELATED TO THE FUNCTIONS OF THE BRAIN AND CAN HAVE NO AUTONOMOUS EXISTENCE BEYOND THE BRAIN, NOR CAN THEY SURVIVE ITS DEATH. IN THIS VIEW MIND IS A SUBJECTIVE MANIFESTATION OF CONSCIOUSNESS. THE HUMAN BRAIN'S ABILITY TO BE AWARE OF ITS OWN EXISTENCE. THE CONCEPT OF THE MIND IS THEREFORE A MEANS BY WHICH THE CONSCIOUS BRAIN UNDERSTANDS ITS OWN OPERATIONS.

THE DEBATE ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE MIND IS RELEVANT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. IF THE MIND IS INDEED A THING SEPARATE FROM OR HIGHER THAN THE FUNCTIONING OF THE BRAIN, THEN PRESUMABLY IT WILL NOT BE POSSIBLE FOR ANY MACHINE, NO MATTER HOW SOPHISTICATED, TO DUPLICATE IT. IF ON THE OTHER HAND THE MIND IS NO MORE THAN THE AGGREGATED FUNCTIONS OF THE BRAIN, THEN IT WILL BE POSSIBLE, AT LEAST IN THEORY, TO CREATE A MACHINE WITH A MIND.

IN PSYCHOANALYTIC THEORY, THE UNCONSCIOUS REFERS TO THAT PART OF MENTAL FUNCTIONING OF WHICH SUBJECTS MAKE THEMSELVES UNAWARE. THE PSYCHOANALYTIC UNCONSCIOUS IS SIMILAR TO BUT NOT PRECISELY THE SAME AS THE POPULAR NOTION OF THE SUBCONSCIOUS.

FOR PSYCHOANALYSIS, THE UNCONSCIOUS DOES NOT INCLUDE ALL OF WHAT IS SIMPLY NOT CONSCIOUS. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE E.G. MOTOR SKILLS BUT RATHER, ONLY WHAT IS ACTIVELY REPRESSED FROM CONSCIOUS THOUGHT.

THE UNCONSCIOUS MIND WAS A DEPOSITORY FOR SOCIALLY UNACCEPTABLE IDEAS, WISHES OR DESIRES, TRAUMATIC MEMORIES AND PAINFUL EMOTIONS PUT OUT OF MIND BY THE MECHANISM OF PSYCHOLOGICAL REPRESSION. HOWEVER, THE CONTENTS DID NOT NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE SOLELY NEGATIVE. IN THE PSYCHOANALYTIC VIEW, THE UNCONSCIOUS MIND IS A FORCE THAT CAN ONLY BE RECOGNISED BY ITS EFFECTS. IT EXPRESSES ITSELF IN THE SYMPTOM.

UNCONSCIOUS THOUGHTS ARE NOT DIRECTLY ACCESSIBLE TO ORDINARY INTROSPECTION, BUT IT IS CAPABLE OF BEING "TAPPED" AND "INTERPRETED" BY SPECIAL METHODS AND TECHNIQUES SUCH AS RANDOM ASSOCIATION, DREAM ANALYSIS AND VERBAL SLIPS, EXAMINED AND CONDUCTED DURING PSYCHOANALYSIS.

IF THE UNCONSCIOUS IS STRUCTURED LIKE A LANGUAGE, THEN THE SELF IS DENIED ANY POINT OF REFERENCE TO WHICH TO BE 'RESTORED' FOLLOWING TRAUMA OR 'IDENTITY CRISIS'. IN THIS WAY, THE STRUCTURALLY DYNAMIC UNCONSCIOUS IS ALSO A CHALLENGE TO THE EGO PSYCHOLOGY.

THERE IS A GREAT CONTROVERSY OVER THE CONCEPT OF AN UNCONSCIOUS IN REGARD TO ITS SCIENTIFIC OR RATIONAL VALIDITY AND WHETHER THE UNCONSCIOUS MIND EXISTS AT ALL. 

DENIAL OCCURS WHEN SOMEONE FENDS OFF AWARENESS OF AN UNPLEASANT TRUTH OR OF A REALITY THAT IS A THREAT TO THE EGO. FOR EXAMPLE, A STUDENT MAY HAVE RECEIVED A BAD GRADE ON A REPORT CARD BUT TELLS HIMSELF THAT GRADES DON'T MATTER. 

REACTION FORMATION TAKES PLACE WHEN A PERSON TAKES THE OPPOSITE APPROACH CONSCIOUSLY COMPARED TO WHAT THAT PERSON WANTS UNCONSCIOUSLY. FOR EXAMPLE, SOMEONE MAY ENGAGE IN VIOLENCE AGAINST ANOTHER RACE BECAUSE, THAT PERSON CLAIMS, THE MEMBERS OF THE RACE ARE INFERIOR, WHEN UNCONSCIOUSLY IT IS THAT VERY PERSON WHO FEELS INFERIOR. 

DISPLACEMENT TAKES PLACE WHEN SOMEONE REDIRECTS EMOTION FROM A "DANGEROUS" OBJECT TO A "SAFE" ONE, SUCH AS PUNCHING A PILLOW TO AVOID HITTING A FRIEND. 

REPRESSION OCCURS WHEN AN EXPERIENCE IS SO PAINFUL (SUCH AS WAR TRAUMA) THAT IT IS UNCONSCIOUSLY FORCED FROM CONSCIOUSNESS, WHILE SUPPRESSION IS A CONSCIOUS EFFORT TO DO THE SAME. 

PSYCHOLOGICAL PROJECTION OCCURS WHEN A PERSON "PROJECTS" HIS OR HER OWN UNDESIRABLE THOUGHTS, MOTIVATIONS, DESIRES AND FEELINGS BASICALLY PARTS OF ONESELF ONTO SOMEONE OR SOMETHING ELSE. AN EXAMPLE OF THIS WOULD BE TO SAY THAT SARAH DOESN'T LIKE HASSAN, BUT RATHER THAN TO ADMIT SHE DOESN'T LIKE HASSAN, SHE WILL PROJECT HER SENTIMENT ONTO HASSAN, SAYING THAT HASSAN DOESN'T LIKE HER. 

INTELLECTUALISATION INVOLVES REMOVING ONE'S SELF, EMOTIONALLY, FROM A STRESSFUL EVENT. INTELLECTUALISATION IS OFTEN ACCOMPLISHED THROUGH RATIONALISATION RATHER THAN ACCEPTING REALITY, ONE MAY EXPLAIN IT AWAY TO REMOVE ONE'S SELF. 

RATIONALISATION INVOLVES CONSTRUCTING A LOGICAL JUSTIFICATION FOR A DECISION THAT WAS ORIGINALLY ARRIVED AT THROUGH A DIFFERENT MENTAL PROCESS. FOR EXAMPLE, HASSAN MAY HAVE BOUGHT A TAPE PLAYER TO LISTEN TO SELF-HELP TAPES, BUT HE TELLS HIS FRIENDS HE BOUGHT IT SO THAT HE CAN LISTEN TO CLASSICAL MUSIC FOR FEAR OF HIS ACTUAL REASON BEING REJECTED. 

COMPENSATION OCCURS WHEN SOMEONE TAKES UP ONE BEHAVIOUR BECAUSE ONE CANNOT ACCOMPLISH ANOTHER BEHAVIOUR. FOR EXAMPLE, THE SECOND BORN CHILD MAY CLOWN AROUND TO GET ATTENTION SINCE THE OLDER CHILD IS ALREADY AN ACCOMPLISHED SCHOLAR.