Plastow Michael
Alfred CAMHS, 999 Nepean Hwy, Moorabbin, VIC 3189, Australia.
Australas Psychiatry. 2012 Aug;20(4):291-4. doi: 10.1177/1039856212449670. Epub 2012 Jul 5.
'Theory of mind' will be further examined firstly by looking at the experimental situation that was used to put forward this notion. A fundamental difficulty regarding the failure of 'theory of mind' to account for the misunderstandings of everyday life will be discussed. Other difficulties in the experimental conceptualisation of this notion will then be studied. Critiques that have previously been made of 'theory of mind' will also be examined.
'Theory of mind' proposes an ideal of limpid understanding of the other. It is argued here that this notion of mind-reading is belied by its failure in our everyday lives. The experimental results by which this notion was proposed are neither sensitive nor specific. It is argued that there is also a fundamental error in this conception and its experimental design due to assessing a second-person phenomenon by a third-person method. Critiques of 'theory of mind' emphasise the epistemological difficulties and the fact that it is a poor explanation for the interactions of non-autistic subjects.
首先,将通过审视用于提出“心理理论”这一概念的实验情境,对其进行进一步考察。将讨论“心理理论”无法解释日常生活中的误解这一基本难题。接着将研究该概念在实验概念化方面的其他难题。还将审视先前对“心理理论”的批判。
“心理理论”提出了一种对他人透彻理解的理想状态。本文认为,这种读心术概念在我们的日常生活中并不成立,因而被证明是错误的。提出这一概念的实验结果既不敏感也不具特异性。本文认为,由于用第三人称方法评估第二人称现象,这一概念及其实验设计还存在根本性错误。对“心理理论”的批判强调了认识论上的困难,以及它对非自闭症受试者互动的解释力不足这一事实。