Autismo

Philosophers have identified two different ways in which we may attribute emotional and mental states to others Theory-Theory (TT) and Simulation Theory (ST). Describe the characteristics of these two theories, indicate what their strong and weak points are, and explain what the relevance of each may be for an understanding of the social deficits in autism.

Autism is a severe, persistent social disorder which can affect a person’s verbal and nonverbal communication, as well as having restricted patterns of behaviour (Hulme and Snowling, 2008). A major social deficit in autism is not being able to attribute emotional and mental states to others. According to Davis and Stone (1995) for someone without autism it requires very little effort to produce concepts like beliefs, desires and mental states of others. For someone with autism it very difficult to do and in most cases impossible, they cannot understand concepts from someone else’s point of view. This problem is of great interest to philosophers who have identified two ways which explain this deficit called Theory-Theory (TT) and Simulation Theory (ST). This essay will look in depth at both theories, comparing then, whilst looking at how effective they are at explaining this particular deficit in autism.

The Simulation Theory (ST) according to some philosophers is fundamental when trying to explain concepts like beliefs and desires. This theory states that to understand someone’s mental state we have to simulate their feelings and produce them within ourselves (Nietzsche, 1977). Another way of looking at it is that we produce pretend beliefs and desires ‘putting yourself in someone elses shoes’ to understand their mental states and provides a practical reasoning mechanism for that persons behaviour (also termed mindreading).

ST can be divided into low level and high level mindreading. High level mindreading refers to simulating mental states of a complex nature that requires conscious effort (Goldman, 2006). Low level mindreading is what we are interested in as is refers to attributing an emotion to others which is called FaBER (face based emotion recognition). This attribution is according to Goldman (2006) is an unconscious and automatic process in which a person does not have to engage any conscious thought process. The persons emotion is simulated and then that emotion is categorised into specific emotions, which is a simpler task than simulating belief/desires which will be discussed later on in the essay.

In discussing autism through ST the deficit of mindreading (understanding someone else’s mental state) is a major characteristic as describe earlier in the essay. The deficit in mindreading is also known as a deficit in empathy. This deficit as described by Baron-Cohen (2003) who has said that to be empathic a person needs high motivation and interest in others mental states, which is lacking in people with autism. This is demonstrated in their impaired social skills as they are unable to read social situations correctly. Someone with autism will often offend people by saying something inappropriate as they do not understand someone else’s feelings/emotions (Mash and Wolfe, 2007).

Simulation involves more complex imagination as you have to imagine what is going on in someone else’s head. Imagination is one of the triads of impairments of autism (Wing, 1980) so without this ability the individual will have difficulty in simulating others which helps to explain how someone with autism will have difficulty in seeing things from another’s point of view.

Although ST is just part of the story and cannot explain everything which leads onto Theory-Theory (TT). TT says that to be able to attribute emotional and mental states to others we must accept a theory of the particular state we are experiencing. According to Goldman (2006) TT sees mental states as theoretical terms (which are introduced by a theory) and the meaning of which is determined by the theory of mind. The theory of mind is scientific as Mitchell (1996) said a person has to apply a formulae and rules to understand and predict what someone is thinking and that the process is innate and happens subconsciously. A person’s theory of mind develops and changes as a person matures and learns more about the world. As stated by Goldman (2006) a child develops much like a ‘little scientist’ as they get new information they revise and change their theory. Everything that we understand is because we have a theory of it already, which is only used when needed.

Theory of mind allows us to see and predict behaviour in the right way (Hirschfeld & Gelman, 1995). For example with theory of mind you will see ‘the intention to reach’ but without you will not see an intention but a random arm movement. A theory helps to shape our observations of everything happening around us giving us a better understanding of what is going on.

Unlike ST which executes a practical reasoning mechanism TT executes a theoretical reasoning mechanism and mental states are not attributed by ‘mentalizing’ but by domain general learning mechanisms (Goldman, 2006). This means that any attributions that are made are done by using theories which are available in our brain, so it is not necessary to simulate any emotional or mental states. Having a theory is sufficient enough.

TT can be explained by looking at mental states in general, TT sees them as inner states of an organism, which is understood to cause behaviour, other mental states and be caused by perceptions (Hirschfeld and Gelman, 1994). This best describes the mental states of beliefs and desires. For example the belief that ‘there is a dog in the room’ requires someone to have the theory of mind to give meaning to the belief and cause particular thoughts such as ‘dog is in front of them’. As stated before beliefs and desires are more complex than understanding the emotion of another, TT can explain the understanding of beliefs and desires better than emotions.

As TT states that emotion mindreading (the understanding of emotions) happens through a specific module that is dedicated for that purpose only (Goldman, 2006). So if that area was damaged it should predict impairments in emotion mindreading as being unable to experience a certain emotion. Although it cannot predict a specific emotion impairment which can be explained better by ST as mentioned above when discussing FaBER ( Face based emotion recognition). When explaining emotional states using TT it is better for predicting general emotion impairment not specific.

However, TT has a different explaining for FaBER that for emotion recognition to take place the person needs to have visually obtained knowledge of facial configurations, semantic knowledge of the configurations and general knowledge of the specific emotion (Goldman, 2006). Simulation