A Theory of Mind? Or A Theory of War....

Post Reply New Topic

i totally failed sally anne test as an adult, and it was totally not due to language pr cognitive deficits other than deficits in social cognition, which i totally suck at

It's a claim, it's an interpretation of the results of the experiments rather than any sort of mathematical proof. Other people have interpreted the experiments different ways. It really seems you are largely unfamiliar with how experimental psychology and experiment design works in general as it's not anywhere near as cut and dry as you are making it.



Pretty sure the children in most the experiments were a bit older than that. For years SBC argued that autism was DEFINED by the lack of theory of mind (this started back in 1985), but it's now known that notion is utter nonsense. Also, it's certainly NOT only this forum that the myth that autism is defined by a lack of empathy is prevalent. If you think it's only on this forum than you really most not get out much. You're not debunking anything, you're just arrogantly preaching to the choir in that regard.



You endless repeat yourself because you don't LISTEN to what is actually being said, you just attach yourself to whatever you hear that fits your narrative of what is going on here and say the same thing to that again. YOU are displaying textbook case cognitive bias. Your persecution complex really isn't helping you either.



EVERYONE is biased, but thinking you aren't biased is actually the most hallmark trait for being suspectable to confirmation bias as assuming you're not biased prevents you from checking your own ideals. The outside observer can tell you are EXTREMELY biased.



This is a blatant lie:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7785900228
http://www.goodtherapy.org/blog/asperge ... nd-0831125
https://www.autism.com/understanding_theoryofmind

No matter how many times you say a lie, it doesn't make it anymore true.



Of course you came to that conclusion, you didn't even bother reading what this thread is actually about.



I don't think so, it's pretty obvious you have problems with language, and it's also pretty obvious you have theory of mind.

My remarks RE confirmation bias were only aimed at B19, no-one else, and now everyone is talking about "traditional" bias as if the two are the same thing. It just shows people jump in without really understanding.



If you don't have anything new to add I suggest you go back to ignoring me.

For those of you who hold a more expanse view of the autistic spectrum, the following little piece I wrote might resonate with you. I write from personal experience about being in the spectrum.

Autism........it's not what you think

"He who sees the infinite in all things, sees God, and he who sees the ratio only sees himself only"- William Blake
______________________

Your mind is not conscious, it is an instrument of consciousness. You have little interest in believing theories about how your mind works, but every interest in consciousness itself and in observing it and learning from what you experience.

Autism is for you a way of being, and as such can never adequately be conveyed through theories, concepts or analysis. "I didn't arrive," said Albert Einstein, "at my understanding of the fundamental laws of the universe through my rational mind." And you know exactly where he was coming from.

Your early experience of the educational system was daunting. It placed emphasis on teaching what to think over how to think, and on rewarding those with good memories at the expense of good ideas. Such a system can contribute to a society lacking imagination and insight into the subtleties of humanity. This lack of insight is there to be seen in the area of autism, where many specialists inevitably succumb to a "this is the way that it is" mindset, when "it" is often totally at odds with your own experience of being in the autistic spectrum.

Autism is for you a way of perceiving reality in a particular way. Oscar Wilde enters into this wonderfully when he says, "The final mystery is oneself. When one has weighed the sun in the balance, and measured the steps of the moon, and mapped out the seven heavens star by star, there still remains oneself. Who can calculate the orbit of his own soul?"

People in the autistic spectrum offer a unique and rich dimension to humanity as a whole, which is not just limited to the areas of science, maths, information technology, and engineering. For it is equally true to say that amongst people in the spectrum there are many contemplatives many of whom you have met yourself. In the areas of poetry and literature too, there is a very long list of writers who were most likely on the spectrum, people like Emily Dickenson, Lewis Carol, and Hans Christian Anderson. Also, In the area of philosophy there are people like Henry Thoreau, Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein, to name just a few. Such diversity can never be confined nor defined by theories or concepts.

Autism is so much more than you can possibly imagine, beyond any interpretation or definition. It is certainly not what you think it to be.

Most of you are using the word "lack" as a synonym of "no". That is only a partial definition of the word. When we say a drought is caused by lack of rain we usually mean less rain then average not no rain at all. But for TOM or empathy is it often or directly said or implied it means no TOM or empathy which in itself might be an example of lack of empathy in practice. Even assuming SBC is a self serving fraudster on the level of Wakefield does not mean he was not on to something. There are post after post on this site where people are complaining of difficulties caused by what looks like lack of empathy or ToM. The above is not neccasarily incompatible with the social model of disabilty. These Autistic "deficits" does not often mean the Autstics empathy/TOM is wrong, but different enough to cause a lot of difficulties.

I relate to a lot of what the blogger Musings of an Aspie had to say about these matters

The Empathy Conundrum

I don't have problems with language as an adult, although I had delayed language development, and I do have problems with ToM, although I am not lacking completely in ToM. I got perfect scores on SAT verbal, SAT II writing, and GRE verbal. It's very strange that you would judge that it is pretty obvious that I have problems with language.

Besides the sally anne, I also failed a basic visual perspective taking task where you show what something looks like from someone else's perspective. This involves less language than the sally anne, and it would use my super good skills in mental rotation and visual spatial areas. However, I still failed due to low ToM, because I automatically take my own perspective instead of others, just like I did for sally anne.

Yes, I do agree there is a lot of problems with the language around these issues and said as much on this thread. I also agree that people post problems around these issues yet when anyone brings up SBC the hatred is palpable. People need to get real and recognise they have a disability, and that autism isn't all about being a savant, or great at this, or amazing at that, or the "next step in evolution", and stop shooting the messenger.

SBC is not the messenger. He is one researcher. Your distinction between empathy and theory of mind is dubious to me. How can they not be related?
Anyway, I agree that autism is a disability; I'm just not sure about the hero worship.

Hi AsPartOfMe,

Great post and blog reference. Between you, the blog post, and SocOfAutism, I now see empathy in a new way, so thanks for sharing.

IMHO, this whole thing is about language, rather than empathizing or not empathizing with SBC. Not sure if that's what you were trying to say with your 'lack of empathy in practice?'

Again why the pejorative words? Why does agreeing with someone equal hero worship? When someone posts a link saying that autistic people actually have too much empathy do you get on at them, why the hero worship?

Like I said, people on this forum really need to get over themselves and start living in the real world. This clique of self-validation isn't healthy.

This test sounds interesting. Is a form of it available online?

Because your condescension is annoying.
It doesn't.
Baron Cohen is too dismissive of challenges to his mode of thinking. Along with a lack of empathy, I think evil comes from an enjoyment of another's suffering and narcissism.

So why make the accusation?


Being dismissive to people who don't agree with you....gee...I bet that's annoying....



If you're referring to the mistaken belief that SBC says autistic people are evil or less-than-human then please pay more attention, I've already debunked that.

Excerpt from an interview between SNC and Autism Speaks, 2015:


Autism Speaks: You’re famous for your “theory of mind” research. What are its practical applications?

Dr. Baron-Cohen: During my year as a teacher, I became fascinated by the possibility that children with autism didn’t think about what other people were thinking. For example, a child would come right up close to someone else’s face, unaware that the other person might consider this intrusion odd or unsettling.

One boy, age 14, grabbed my glasses and threw them across the room because he didn’t like gold-framed glasses. My startled look of surprise seemed of no concern to him. A 13-year-old girl wandered into her parents’ dinner party with no clothes on, apparently unaware of what the guests were thinking. This absence of embarrassment in teenagers with autism gave me the clue that their “theory of mind,” or awareness of other people’s thoughts, was not developing typically.

Another child would ask me the same set of questions every day (“Is your birthday on a Tuesday this year?”) despite knowing the answer. She wasn’t using language to impart or get new information, and she wasn’t concerned about what I thought about her question. She was simply repeating statements to confirm the factual patterns that interested her.

My PhD proposal was to test whether this aspect of social cognition – understanding what others were thinking – might be delayed or impaired in autism. This led Uta Frith, my co-supervisor Alan Leslie and me to develop the “Sally Anne Test” of false belief.

Well I haven't grabbed anyone's glasses yet, nor attended a dinner party naked, nor do I lack a faculty for embarrassment, and no amount of funding or any other incentive could inspire me to formulate a theory that all NTs lack a proposed theory of mind because some do very inappropriate things.

I have also failed sally and anne test in november 2010.
In my view it was because of the visual thinking mind of mine, because the words evoke pictures in my mind and they just stay in my mind and if the marble is told to be in the box, this image just stayed in my visual mind.
No language problem as well.
Because in the language I operate in "where will [..] look for the marble" is a clear sentence.