Difficult point: the boundaries between our self and the world seems simple: “our skin.”  But the reciprocal interactions between organisms and the environments they inhabit make those boundaries on occasion seem very indistinct.  (Jill Taylor mentions this in her “Stroke of Insight” video).  It is not so rare an experience for individuals to have a vivid sense of “being one with everything.”  On other occasions, we sense our intersubjectivity … connections with another person–“being of the same mind” when we think alike or “two hearts that beat as one” when we seem to have the same feelings.

 Many of us pursue that feeling.  BUT WE as organisms consider that individual boundaries enable constructive or critical thinking about how to be–how to behave. So we intuitively set aside those connections (phenomenologists call this “bracketing“).  The diversity of things contained within our skin communicate with with each other more easily than they communicate with what is outside.  Connections are within and between “levels of organization” and the individual person is one such level. 

      WHAT ARE OTHER PEOPLE FEELING?

•  
• INTERSUBJECTIVITY (an aspect of INDIVIDUATION X SOCIALIZATION) — so we know a bit about mirror neurons; theory of mind; empathy– NOW, maybe you really can feel someone else’s pain:  “Researchers have found that the rat brain activates the same cells when they observe the pain of others as when they experience pain themselves. In addition, without activity of these ‘mirror neurons,’ the animals no longer share the pain of others. Finding the neural basis for sharing the emotions of others is an exciting step towards understanding empathy.”  (popular link) (technical link)

Arguably, a need for intersubjective meaning is close to the essence of what it means to be human;  we intuit this loss at a deep existential level when we posit a reason for someone’s distress or even dysfunctional behavior as “because they are lonely.”  Here we recall Aristotle’s’ observation: He who is unable to live in society, or who has no need because he is sufficient for himself, must be either a beast or a god.  (Aristotle 384-322 BC, Politics bk. 1, 1253a 27-9) [i]  Look more deeply into this most poignant of needs: start at A&O post on Loneliness,  Wikipedia on Loneliness, then go back to AO-needs-sociality-and-physiology-loneliness/  

ENCOURAGED by the ARTS?   BUT development never ends and an interesting developmental aspect of theory of mind studied in adults is how it was enriched in adults as a result of their reading literary fiction: 

        A Good Read (from excerpts at A&O notes on Connections between Individuals):

      Theory of Mind is the human capacity to comprehend that other people hold beliefs and desires and that these may differ from one’s own beliefs and desires. The currently predominant view is that literary fiction—often described as narratives that focus on in-depth portrayals of subjects’ inner feelings and thoughts—can be linked to theory of mind processes, especially those that are involved in the understanding or simulation of the affective characteristics of the subjects. Kidd and Castano (2013) provide experimental evidence that reading passages of literary fiction, in comparison to nonfiction or popular fiction, does indeed enhance the reader’s performance on theory of mind tasks.

      Abstract.  Understanding others’ mental states is a crucial skill that enables the complex social relationships that characterize human societies. Yet little research has investigated what fosters this skill, which is known as Theory of Mind (ToM), in adults. We present five experiments showing that reading literary fiction led to better performance on tests of affective ToM  and cognitive ToM  compared with reading nonfiction, popular fiction, or nothing at all. Specifically, these results show that reading literary fiction temporarily enhances ToM. More broadly, they suggest that ToM may be influenced by engagement with works of art.”  (From David Comer Kidd and Emanuele Castano ‘s (2013) article “Reading Literary Fiction Improves Theory of  Mind.”)

DEEP ETHOLOGY can help:

• DEVELOPMENT. 

  Developing infants reach a stage in which they manifest some insight into what another individual is likely thinking.  This is their THEORY-OF-MIND: at an early age (about 3-4 years old) we tend to assume that others have minds much like ours (overview of typical developmental path at a Hanen.org site)[i]

  • A fully developed theory of mind is preceded and incorporates an understanding of attention (at about 8 months; Simon Baron-Cohen).  In fact, sharing selective attention may be, Baron-Cohen’s view, an early motive for all communicating.  ToM  also involves a capacity to infer the intentions of others (the “intentional stance” as defined by Daniel Dennett).  The capacity to imitate may lie “at the origins of both theory of mind and other social-cognitive achievements like perspective-taking and empathy.

    “While much research has been done on infants, theory of mind develops continuously throughout childhood and into late adolescence as the synapses (neuronal connections) in the prefrontal cortex develop. The prefrontal cortex is responsible for planning and decision-making.^[26] Children seem to develop theory of mind skills sequentially. The first skill to develop is the ability to recognize that others have diverse desires. Children are able to recognize that others have diverse beliefs soon after. The next skill to develop is recognizing that others have access to different knowledge bases. Finally, children are able to understand that others may have false beliefs and that others are capable of hiding emotions.

• ECOLOGY.  Consider the context in which the nervous system and its functions develop. 

  • While the sequence of morphological and cognitive changes enables the general trend in skill acquisition, it seems that more emphasis is placed on some skills in certain cultures, leading to more valued skills to develop before those that are considered not as important. For example, in individualistic cultures such as the United States, a greater emphasis is placed on the ability to recognize that others have different opinions and beliefs. In a collectivistic culture, such as China, this skill may not be as important and therefore may not develop until later.”  (Wikipedia)

     

• EVOLUTION.  Consider the adaptive advantage of knowing what others are thinking .  An early “theory of consciousness
  • (“Whoever looketh into himself and considers what he does when he does think, opine, reason, hope, fear, etc., and upon what grounds, he shall thereby read and know what are the thoughts and passions of all other men upon the like occasions.”—Thomas Hobbes 1651 Leviathan)

• PHYSIOLOGY.  The development of Theory-of-Mind is, as in all cognitive competencies, tied to maturation of brain structures (but everything is maturing more-or-less rapidly (depending on stage of maturation).
  • Efforts to localize networks or nodes of particular significance have identified “… the human temporo-parietal junction [as] involved specifically in reasoning about the contents of another person’s mind” (Saxe & Kanwisher 2003)
  • In light of the principles of embodied cognition (see below) we can expect changes in anatomy and physiology apart from the nervous system itself to have an effect on the extent to which we believe we know what other people are likely thinking.]  We might, in fact, know more explicitly what others are thinking by examining our own body’s response to observing them?  This would be predicted by the phenomenologically oriented idea of EMBODIED COGNITION.]