Social Delusion (so-shal de-lu'zhun) n. 1. An illogical and disordered state of mind shared by a majority of the human race, which consists of the inherent, probably genetically determined, illogical belief that they have already communicated with each other, before any actual communication has taken place. 2. Zool. A state of mind of various biological creatures which causes them to identify with others of the same species. This identification can involve physical appearance, vocalizations, and also reciprocal, ritualized behavior. (i.e. Whooping Crane mating rituals.) Adj. Socially Deluded. Neurotypical or NT

The Theory of Social Delusion

Is there really such a thing as a "Theory of Mind"? A theory is usually something that can be written down or explained to another person, yet the people who supposedly have it, don't ever explain it. This makes me wonder if it exists at all.

Perhaps the "normal" people are suffering from a delusion, a SOCIAL DELUSION. They think (erroneously) that they are alike, that they have already communicated and that no more communication is necessary.

If no more communication is necessary, than any attempt at communication is a step in the wrong direction. If someone greets me at work with "How are you today?" and I tell them that my allergies are making me upset, this is WRONG. I'm supposed to say "Fine" -- which is neither true nor meaningful.

I once saw a bunch of geese all swimming in a line in a farm pond; some were white geese that live on the farm and spend their winters in the barn, the rest were Canada geese who were migrating from far away. Obviously their life experiences were quite different, to say nothing of appearance, and yet they had communicated their sameness to each other. Obviously they possessed that elusive quality called "Theory of Mind" and are therefore superior to me.

What they had done was bob in the correct way, fluff their feathers in the correct way, make a few appropriate honks and voila -- "Theory of Mind."

How did this Social Delusion get started? It's obvious from an evolutionary standpoint. Suppose there were two tribes of cavemen. In one tribe no one could ever agree on anything. Instead of going deer hunting they would have existential arguments like "Is the deer in my mind the same as the deer in you mind?" Obviously they would go hungry, and probably not survive.

Suppose the other tribe was full of folks who just said "The heck with all that existential stuff, let's just hunt deer." Of course they would survive better, not only because they wouldn't go hungry but because a lot of stress would be eliminated. The harshness of existence would be softened.

Eventually the social delusion would give such an advantage in terms of survival, that it would become hard wired.

Have you ever noticed that "normal" people cannot think about the possibility that each person might live in a separate world? They can accept it as an intellectual curiousity suitable for a philosphy class, but on a day-to-day basis? They will change the subject rapidly because it causes anxiety they aren't prepared to handle.

Anyway, before I buy into a "Theory of Mind" as something other people have, but I don't, I want to know what it is.

-Perkons

TOM = Emperor's New Clothes

I've been reading a book called "Understanding Other Minds" and although it sounds logical (or at least authoritative), I wonder and wonder about this "Theory of Mind" theory.

First of all, since autistics back away from people, but not from objects, they must perceive some difference between the two. If they had no "theory of mind" then there would be no difference between people and, say, tables or boom boxes or VCR's.

I have a very good "Theory of Mind" -- and most autistics, except perhaps the severely retarded -- probably have one too. The problem is that it's A DIFFERENT THEORY.

What has always amazed me is that NT people seem to feel that they "know" each other to a far greater degree than is realistic.

I've been thinking of ways that this social delusion could come about -- of course a tendency toward it must be hard-wired -- but how does it come about. The social delusion is so far-fetched.

OK -- for example.

In a bedroom a three-week old baby is sleeping in a crib and his mom is sleeping on the bed. The Mom, after a hard day of taking care of things, is enjoying a beautiful dream about surfing in Hawaii -- waves, sky, etc. That's what's going on in her head.

On the other side of the room, baby is getting hungry. She feels an uncomfortable sensation and "Whaaaaa".

Mom wakes up, not too thrilled about having to leave Hawaii, and, half asleep, mostly thinking of waves and such, feeds the baby.

Baby comes to a conclusion. Somehow her feeling of hunger was transferred into her mom, who then fed her.

The problem with this is, mom was never hungry. Baby doesn't know this -- at this point baby has either "aggrandized" mom or projected herself into mom or something like that. Perhaps that's where the social delusion begins.

I suppose with me that didn't happen. (My mother reports that in fact, it did not.)

There is a TOM experiment in the book that I really like:

The child is shown two closed boxes on a table. Another person is on the other side of the table. A piece of candy is placed in one box -- call it box A. A polaroid photograph is taken of the candy being placed in box A and this photo is placed on the table, face down. The other person leaves the room.

While the other person is out of the room, the candy is taken out of box A and placed in box B.

Then the person who left the room comes back in. The child is asked "Where does the person who was out of the room think the candy is?"

Both normal and autistic kids at around age three thought that the person would say "Box B".

But, were they thinking the same way? I think the NT kids were assuming that the "person" was the "same" as they were, an extension of their own mind and emotions, and therefore would think the candy was in Box B, just as they now knew it was.

The autistic kids would have been baffled, as I would have been. From my experience adults and older kids knew a lot of things that I didn't. In fact, they could do a lot of things that were "magical" to me -- they could drive cars, they knew where the cereal was without looking for it, they could open latches which I couldn't open, they could light the gas burners, etc.

So how can a sensible child possibly imagine what on earth the adult or older kid might or might not know? For all he knows, adults have X-ray vision. You might as well try to imagine what a dolphin thinks in the ocean or how a bee perceives the garden.

Now when both groups of kids reach four, the NT kids will now say that the person who was out of the room when the candy was moved, still thinks it's in box A because he didn't see it being moved. They will guess "Box A" - and prove that they have TOM. The autistic kids will still be baffled about what the other person may or may not know. That won't change with time either, except by observation and logic.

What is interesting is that the autistic kids at four will excel at knowing what's on the photograph -- the photograph has not changed -- it still pictures the candy going into Box A. Of course it hasn't changed! Photographs don't change. Any nincompoop knows that!

The basic difference seems to be:

NT Theory of Mind = Everyone thinks like me, except when shown to be otherwise.

Autistic Theory of Mind = Everyone thinks differently from me -- vastly and mysteriously -- except when shown to be otherwise.

-Perkons

Return to the index page