Lumawo wrote:Does that make sense to anyone?
Yes.
Pulled from another thread, on the subject of 'mind reading'. (Obviously there are also good things associated with Theory of Mind as well, namely empathy, compassion, remorse...):
I doubt there's a clear distinction between mind reading and say, emotional intelligence/empathy/social awareness.
For me, the thing becomes a problem when a person engages in idle and/or largely unfounded speculation at another's expense and presents that speculation as fact instead of the opinion that it is. Especially when that speculation reflects negatively on/smears someone, especially when that speculation serves to distract from/sidestep a larger argument or criticism against the speculator (in other words, when used as ad hominem diversion), especially when the speculator refuses to back up his/her opinion with any evidence (simply asserting that something is self evidently true or true because they say so), especially when the accusations being levied (or insinuated) seem to attack the target or pin them up against a wall, forcing them to justify or explain their own private mental processes in order to 'clear their name' (in other words, as an intrusion into someone's mental privacy or headspace), especially when the speculator seems unpersuadable on the point (for example, if they continue insisting a thing is true no matter how much evidence is presented to the contrary), and especially when the accusations being levied against the target are unfalsifiable. Under those circumstances, especially, mind reading (or what I'm calling 'mind reading') seems in particularly bad form.
These are comments I've made elsewhere:
(from 'Are ASPD stupid' thread)
...He asked a question, I answered it. His motivations for asking it (whatever they may be) are his own business, I think. I try to avoid playing mind reading games, assigning desires and motives to other people that they haven't owned for themselves. I think it's bad form...
(From the 'Inhibitions' thread)
I've never claimed it's absolutely wrong to mindread or make inferences about what another person is thinking. It's true that sometimes people are self deceived or downright dishonest. It's also true that in that case it's nearly impossible to prove someone is misrepresenting themselves or being dishonest. It would be profoundly silly to keep extending someone behaving suspiciously the benefit of the doubt simply because their ignorance or dishonesty can't be absolutely proven against them...