Date of Graduation
Master of Arts in Philosophy (MA)
Eric M. Funkhouser
Second Committee Member
Philosophy, religion and theology, Psychology, Default, Hybrid account, Mindreading, Mindreading mechanism, Simulation, Theory
Mindreading, or attributing mental states to others, involves instances of simulation and theory; but there is controversy over which one of these methods is the primary, or default, mechanism. I propose that mindreading is a theory-based process, such that we utilize theory over simulation when both are available and reliable. To argue my position, I suggest that theory has been inaccurately portrayed in past discussion and that we possess two types: a connectionist network (tt1) and a traditional, conceptual folk-psychology (tt2). By dividing theory in this way, we can explain common phenomena of mindreading that other theory-based accounts do not explicitly imply. Previously used as evidence for a simulation-based model, these phenomena are now compatible with a Dual Type Theory Account. Additionally, the distinction between type 1 and type 2 theory invites a new argument for primacy by appealing to the cognitive resources required by a mechanism, such that the primary method will be the one that requires the least amount of effort and is available in every case. Since tt1 is effortless and automatic, it is likely the default process. Tt1 provides us with a modular, fast, unconscious mindreading tool that is not dependent on conceptual knowledge, yet it can be influenced and adjusted by tt2 via supervised learning.
Jewell, A. (2016). An Investigation into Hybrid Models of Mindreading: A Dual Type Theory Account. Theses and Dissertations Retrieved from https://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/1783