I CAN READ YOUR MIND AND READ YOUR LIPS (FROM THE HIPS, LIPS TO THE FINGER TIPS). I CAN TELL YOU WHAT YOU'RE THINKING AND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. AND I CAN DO ALL OF THIS WITHOUT LOOKING AT YOU OR EVEN BEING AROUND YOU*. MY THEORY OF MIND ABILITY FUNCTIONS AT A FAIRLY HIGH LEVEL (https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/aspergers-diary/200805/empathy-mindblindness-and-theory-mind). WHY? BECAUSE I WAS BORN WITH A HIGH CAPACITY FOR THIS ABILITY AND I WAS EXPOSED TO A VARIETY OF PEOPLE OF DIFFERENT AGES FROM DIFFERENT RACES WITH DIFFERENT PERSONALITY TRAITS AT AN EARLY AGE, FURTHER HONING THIS ABILITY!
*DON'T BELIEVE THIS SENTENCE? LISTEN TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OVER THE WORLD SAYING "EXACTLY...YOU READ MY MIND" AFTER READING THE THINGS I WRITE! AND I'M NOWHERE NEAR THESE PEOPLE.
@arinzenevarez that's exactly what I was thinking
But there's more to this puzzle. If theory of mind evolved to facilitate harmonious social interactions, why do Dark Triad individuals score so high on the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test-- a capstone measure of theory of mind?
It turns out there are at least two main dimensions of theory of mind (ToM). The social-perceptual component of ToM involves the ability to determine the mental states of others using immediately available non-verbal cues (e.g., eyes, face, hand gestures). This maps on to the cognitive empathy component, and is what is measured by the Reading the Mind in the Eyes test. This component of theory of mind shows up earlier in development and is related to the right hemisphere medial temporal and orbitofrontal regions of the brain.
In contrast, the social-cognitive component of ToM (not to be confused with cognitive empathy) involves the ability to reason about the mental state of others, and use that reasoning to predict or explain their behavior. This ability involves inferring what others know or believe to be true apart from what you know or believe to be true. This is a later developing skill and is more strongly dependent on linguistic capacities. This component of theory of mind draws on left hemisphere circuitry involving medial frontal areas and the temporoparietal junction.
Daniel Nettle and Bethany Liddle found a relationship between the social-cognitive component of theory of mind, but not the social-perceptual component. It appears that the agreeable, compassionate, altruistic aspect of our human nature is only associated with the higher-level, social-cognitive component of theory of mind.
***
Now for the last few pieces of this puzzle.
Research conducted by Elizabeth Austin and her colleagues show that the onlyelement of emotional intelligence Machiavellian individuals aren't impaired on is the perceiving dimension, which involves the lower-level, pereceptual ability to decipher emotions in faces and pictures. Not only that, but they show a relatively stronger ability to manage the emotions of others than manage their own emotions. This may be related to their empathy and perspective taking deficits: not only can't they spontaneously feel what others are feeling, but even if they could, they would have difficulty labeling or figuring out what the emotions mean. Additionally, Machiavellian individuals endorse emotionally-manipulative behavior. So in their eyes, they are really good at manipulating others.
Zsofia Esperger and Tamas Bereczkei in Hungary wondered whether despite their theory of mind deficits, Machiavellian individuals mentalize more often than others-- in other words, even though their emotional intelligence is impaired, are they still cognitively strategizing, scheming, and trying to infer the intentions of others much more so than those who are less Machiavellian?
Perhaps the development of theory of mind is like the development of athletic ability, mathematical abilities, or even fine motor skills. Most people eventually can do most sports, math problems, and drawing at a level that enables them to be functional. Some people are highly talented. And with coaching and practice, most people can become increasingly capable at any of these innate talents. Same perhaps with the ability to read emotions on others' faces, and the ability to understand that what others are feeling and thinking can be very different from what you yourself are thinking and feeling — and that their feelings and thoughts are equally valid.
Many talents are inherited. Alas, so are talent deficits. Narcissistic parents are more likely to have narcissistic children, just like athletes are likely to have kids with athletic talents. In addition, parents with talents foster these in their kids, and those without talents model how to live without that capability.
There were deep differences between Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis in way of life, with Neandethals being high-risk, highly cooperative hunters, rather like wolves, while anatomically modern humans in Africa had a mixed diet and were more like modern hunter-gatherers. Those differences could mean that big Neanderthal brains were solving different sorts of problems than big African brains. As a purely hypothetical example, Neanderthals, facing high risks as ambush hunters of big game, might have benefited from an ability to imagine and anticipate the reactions of their prey - call it "theory of animal mind." Neanderthals were strong and heavily built but their hunting success depended on brainpower to a far higher degree than that of lions or wolves. Their intelligence made their way of life possible via the use of tools and weapons, but there must have been other ways in which their big brains aided survival. Improved accuracy in guessing just how a wounded bison would react could well have kept a Neanderthal from having his ribs kicked in, for example. There's a precedent for this notion of one species having a theory of mind in dealing with another species: Wolves can't take a hint, but dogs have an evolved ability to read people. (The 10,000 Year Explosion)
.jpg)
.jpg)
MINE REEDER
.jpg)
.jpg)
"I KNOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT I KNOW
THAT THEY KNOW THAT YOUR GIRLFRIEND IS A HO!" - MOOLIE (4th ORDER INTENTIONALITY)
SELF-AWARENESS AND SELF-RECOGNITION ARE THE BEGINNING STAGES OF THEORY OF MIND (IN EVOLUTIONARY STAGES, THE ABILITY TO BE CONSCIOUS OF ONE'S THOUGHTS PRECEDED THE ABILITY TO BE CONSCIOUS OF OTHER PEOPLES' THOUGHTS).
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10097012/
Humans developed or enhanced a skill known to psychologists as theory of mind - the ability to infer what someone else knows or intends...The "theory of mind" module is...another brain circuit...Its utility and survival advantage are evident; almost every social situation requires a forecast of how others may react to one's words or deeds...people being familiar with their own abilities to infer other people's thoughts, would have assumed the gods too possessed theory of mind capabilities ones so penetrating that they could read people's thoughts. Gods from Zeus to the Babylonian Enlil are credited with the ability to read minds..."O Lord, thou hast searched me, and know me," says the psalmist. "Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off...Search me O God, and know my heart: try me and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting."...People who imputed their own thought-reading version of their own theory of mind to the gods inferred that the gods could not be deceived, and came to fear their supervisory powers all the more. (The Faith Instinct)
Further Reading:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/work-your-mind/202302/how-childhood-theory-of-mind-predicts-life-outcomes
