Mind blindness and Theory of Mind

[Kevin1968]

Some people appear to be debating the legal aspects, however it isn't about the legal implications, it is about how people rightly or wrongly apportion blame to the actions of others.

 

[Marina Phantom]

One can logically deduce that Grace isn't to blame because, given her lack of knowledge about the poison, she had no way to purposefully affect the outcome. You can't expect people to act based on knowledge they don't have. The only person to blame is whomever put the poison in the sugar container to begin with.

Your boss, on the other hand, should have observed your past work ethic compared to the lack of information he had about the new guy, and use inductive reasoning to say that the probability of the new guy lying was higher than the probability of you screwing up like he said. With the way you told the story, that would seem like the right judgement call.

However, you could have left out other information, such as...

...maybe the boss knew this guy for a long time before he got hired, and knew him to be an honest, upstanding worker. Observation of past experience would then dictate that the probability of him lying would be lower, which would make the probability of you screwing up higher.

...maybe you've had work related problems in the past. Observation of past experience would then dictate that the probability of you having actually screwed up would've been higher, which would make the probability of the new guy lying lower.

I'm not at all saying that it's your fault since, being a guy several states away reading about this from a computer screen, I have no practical way to confirm one way or the other the legitimacy of the story. I'm not saying I believe, and I'm not saying I don't believe. I choose to be a workplace-incident agnostic.

Oh yeah, and your boss could've, you know, done his job and do an investigation instead of just jumping to conclusions for the sake of being lazy. That way, past credibility wouldn't even have to come into question. You can figure out for a fact who's in the right and who's in the wrong.

With my brand of autism, I function by turning everything into a numbers game. If anything I say offends you, don't take it personally.

 

[Kevin1968]

One can logically deduce that Grace isn't to blame... You can't expect people to act based on knowledge they don't have. The only person to blame is whomever put the poison in the sugar container to begin with.

Your boss, on the other hand, should have observed your past work ethic compared to the lack of information he had about the new guy, and use inductive reasoning to say that the probability of the new guy lying was higher than the probability of you screwing up like he said. With the way you told the story, that would seem like the right judgement call.

However, you could have left out other information, such as...

...maybe the boss knew this guy for a long time before he got hired, and knew him to be an honest, upstanding worker. Observation of past experience would then dictate that the probability of him lying would be lower, which would make the probability of you screwing up higher.

...maybe you've had work related problems in the past. Observation of past experience would then dictate that the probability of you having actually screwed up would've been higher, which would make the probability of the new guy lying lower.

I'm not at all saying that it's your fault since, being a guy several states away reading about this from a computer screen, I have no practical way to confirm one way or the other the legitimacy of the story. I'm not saying I believe, and I'm not saying I don't believe. I choose to be a workplace-incident agnostic.

Oh yeah, and your boss could've, you know, done his job and do an investigation instead of just jumping to conclusions for the sake of being lazy. That way, past credibility wouldn't even have to come into question. You can figure out for a fact who's in the right and who's in the wrong.

With my brand of autism, I function by turning everything into a numbers game. If anything I say offends you, don't take it personally.

No offence taken , The guy wasn't well known to my boss beforehand, but on the other side sure who hasn't made mistakes. The guy was let go a couple of months later so my boss eventually realised he wasn't as good as he claimed to be.

Rightly or wrongly the incident was the trigger in my decision to look for alternative employment, I think if jobs in my area were more plentiful I should have just walked out that day.
Perhaps I was justified in blaming my now former employer for his actions, or perhaps, by applying logic, he was merely acting on the information as he saw it, it no longer really matters
But I am in a much better place now (both employment wise and mentally!!).

 

[BlueSky Aozora]

Perhaps it's because I am aware of ASD traits now, that I am finding them in myself, but I recently became aware that there is a variation of the "Sally Anne" test Sally–Anne test - Wikipedia that is more applicable for adults. The problem with the Sally Anne test is that many of those who are HFA use logic to give the correct answer.

The variation is 'Mind blindness' affects moral reasoning in autism | Spectrum | Autism Research News

One test is
"Two friends take a coffee break at a chemical plant. Mary asks Grace to pass the sugar, and Grace hands her a dispenser clearly labeled ‘Sugar.’ Unbeknownst to either woman, however, the dispenser contains not sugar, but a poisonous chemical that looks like it. Mary drinks her toxin-sweetened coffee and dies a few hours later.

Is Grace to blame?"

Spoiler: answer

(If you are NT you probably say no, if you are ND then you are likely to say yes)

I had a slightly less dramatic version of it happen to me several months ago that I was reminded of when I read that test. My boss was told lies by a co-worker of mine that at the time got me into a lot of trouble, In my eyes my boss was to blame for believing the co-worker. Of course my logical mind now realises that perhaps I shouldn't have blamed him, but logic aside he should have trusted me not the new guy!!

So another tick in the ASD traits list for me, but being aware of it hopefully will mean I can spot it when it happens again. (I hope)

I think those two situations are very different. The toxin coffee story is a sad story. Your story is sad too.

But the difference is the morality. Although we are likely compelled to behave less kind when hearing rumours about somebody, rationally & morally, we should not believe any bad-mouthing or rumours without concrete proof, and we shouldnt even bad-mouth somebody (except under some conditions).

Because that will be slander. There is a saying that slander is more awful than murder.

 

[Kevin1968]

I think those two situations are very different. The toxin coffee story is a sad story. Your story is sad too.

But the difference is the morality. Although we are likely compelled to behave less kind when hearing rumours about somebody, rationally & morally, we should not believe any bad-mouthing or rumours without concrete proof, and we shouldnt even bad-mouth somebody (except under some conditions).

Because that will be slander. There is a saying that slander is more awful than murder.

The real difference is the coffee one is just a story, mine was real

But it did lead to a bit of self-awareness so there is a silver lining.

I wasn't looking for sympathy, when posting this I was more thinking about how I could see the common pattern

 

[BlueSky Aozora]

It's my aim too, use whatever brainpower I can to overcome potential weaknesses..but in order to overcome them I need to recognise them.

I knew I could pass the Sally Anne test, as can most adults I expect, it was only reading the "flawed" example and overlaying that on a real life incident that I could see that I may still be mind-blind.
I expect it means I need to carefully consider a wider variety of options when trying to see someone else's point of view, difficult..not impossible.

I'm also wondering/worried if I'm actually mind-blind and being irresponsible.

For example, I might not realize that I'm ignoring something very important to people around me, thay i need to do, but i dont do because i dont even realize it's important.

Any ways to recognise this kind of mind-blindness in ourselves?

Maybe i need to be with other people more, and observe good/kind habits/acts they do that i didnt bother to do?

A simple example is, to serve your guest with juice or at least water in a nice cup when they come to visit. (Stupid me, i didnt know that this is a normal manner).

NT might say that i'm faking it, but i'm just late to learn it. It's embarrassing as an adult, but hey, better learn & improve than never, right?

 

[BlueSky Aozora]

The real difference is the coffee one is just a story, mine was real

But it did lead to a bit of self-awareness so there is a silver lining.

I wasn't looking for sympathy, when posting this I was more thinking about how I could see the common pattern

I hope things get better for you... Resentment & forgiveness... Difficult things.

Thanks for the interesting & important thread. Please share on how we can recognise our own mind-blindness, if you know more.

 

[Kevin1968]

I hope things get better for you... Resentment & forgiveness... Difficult things.

Thanks for the interesting & important thread. Please share on how we can recognise our own mind-blindness, if you know more.

Forgiveness isn't really in my dictionary, fortunately I forget stuff eventually.

Wish I knew how to recognise mind-blindness without the benefit of hindsight, in your example however it may be simply learning the social etiquette of offering guests food and drink (I know "Sheldon" is too much of a stereotype but "it's customary to offer guests a hot beverage"
The Big Bang Theory Sheldon's Beverage Protocols
)

Similar to when asked "how are you?", the reply is expected to be "fine, how are you?" (I think, it's what I have learnt to say) not a detailed list of how you are actually feeling

 

[BlueSky Aozora]

Forgiveness isn't really in my dictionary, fortunately I forget stuff eventually.

Wish I knew how to recognise mind-blindness without the benefit of hindsight, in your example however it may be simply learning the social etiquette of offering guests food and drink (I know "Sheldon" is too much of a stereotype but "it's customary to offer guests a hot beverage"
The Big Bang Theory Sheldon's Beverage Protocols
)

Similar to when asked "how are you?", the reply is expected to be "fine, how are you?" (I think, it's what I have learnt to say) not a detailed list of how you are actually feeling

Thank you for your suggestion. Yeah, for avoiding simple types of mind-blindness, just need to at least learn the etiquette or go experience it.

Maybe there're several levels of mind-blindness. One of it would be related to responsibility or maybe helping-each-other situation. Sometimes, some people & me too are overwhelmed with our own task, thus not noticing or doesn't have the attention span to notice on how to help others.

An example I got from the internet is, an aspie and the NT relatives are going to picnic by car. When they arrive, the NT relatives are busy bringing stuffs from the car to the picnic place, preparing for the picnic; while the aspie is like, "What are we doing now? What should I do now?"

Or another example is, an aspie helps doing house chores by throwing out the garbage into the garbage can outside the house, as requested by the partner; but doesn't put the lid on, because it was not instructed by the partner. The garbage then was shred by the dogs and crows, making the place dirty.

These are merely examples. Of course, from experience aspies too know how to act in those situations.

 

[Clueless in Canada]

The scenario says 'unbeknownst to either woman' which means we are being told that in this situation Grace does not know this isn't a container of sugar. It is a very childish mind that thinks Grace is to blame simply because she handed over the container but this poorly developed level of thinking, this lack of theory of mind persists as a diagnostic point in autism. I am very skeptical about that and believe the theory of mind difficulties will vary along with the IQ (not that IQ is a totally valid measure of intelligence) of the autistic individual.

 

[Kevin1968]

The scenario says 'unbeknownst to either woman' which means we are being told that in this situation Grace does not know this isn't a container of sugar. It is a very childish mind that thinks Grace is to blame simply because she handed over the container but this poorly developed level of thinking, this lack of theory of mind persists as a diagnostic point in autism. I am very skeptical about that and believe the theory of mind difficulties will vary along with the IQ (not that IQ is a totally valid measure of intelligence) of the autistic individual.

I on one level agree that it's simplistic to blame Grace in the scenario, however in real life it may not be as obvious.
I can apply logic and understand that Grace is not to blame, but at a more instinctive level it's s different matter.
When I learnt to play chess I often did the "mate in X moves'" puzzles and got fairly good at them, but in a real game there is nothing to tell you that there is a clever mate just a few moves away!

Solving a puzzle when it's presented as a puzzle is naturally easier and the higher the "IQ" (for want of a better word) then the easier it seems to be.

BUT life isn't that clear, and I suspect that as crude as the Sally Anne test is as a diagnostic device, it may highlight how NTs instinctively deal with social situations that NDs need to "think" about.

 

[Ylva]

I on one level agree that it's simplistic to blame Grace in the scenario, however in real life it may not be as obvious.

Because in real life, only Grace can actually know whether she knew or suspected that wasn't sugar. Even in the story, Grace has to be the narrator to tell us that for sure, and she could be lying.

 

[Kevin1968]

Because in real life, only Grace can actually know whether she knew or suspected that wasn't sugar. Even in the story, Grace has to be the narrator to tell us that for sure, and she could be lying.

Introducing the concept of Grace lying isn't really the point though, it's more about how the theory says NDs are more likely to blame Grace than NTs.

My original post was about how on I had blamed someone, when perhaps on reflection I shouldn't have, but even now on a base (sorry can't get the right word..basic, instinctive, primative, gut feeling etc) level I still do

 

[Oldlady]

I like thinking about 'blame'. We just seem to love assigning blame. We blame ourselves ... we blame others. Is anyone really 'to blame'?

 

[Kevin1968]

Is anyone really 'to blame'?

Always.

 

[Ylva]

Introducing the concept of Grace lying isn't really the point though, it's more about how the theory says NDs are more likely to blame Grace than NTs.

My original post was about how on I had blamed someone, when perhaps on reflection I shouldn't have, but even now on a base (sorry can't get the right word..basic, instinctive, primative, gut feeling etc) level I still do

Because if Grace hadn't given it to her, it might still have happened, but it wouldn't have been Grace giving it to her. If Mary had fetched it herself, then it'd be nobody's fault. Or the company's fault. But not Grace's fault.

Fault means error, right?

Who of us hasn't been chastised for things we didn't mean to do, over and over? Was that suppose to create the impression that anything depended on intent?

 

[Oldlady]

Always.

Always? What about an insane person, a mentally ill person, a very young child?

 

[Oldlady]

Because if Grace hadn't given it to her, it might still have happened, but it wouldn't have been Grace giving it to her. If Mary had fetched it herself, then it'd be nobody's fault. Or the company's fault. But not Grace's fault.

Fault means error, right?

Who of us hasn't been chastised for things we didn't mean to do, over and over? Was that suppose to create the impression that anything depended on intent?

Wouldn't it be Mary's fault by this logic?

Besides ... is blame the same as fault?

 

[Clueless in Canada]

I agree that a puzzle is different from a real life experience where emotions are involved or the confusion of reading people. I think for me confusion would come in scenarios that involve relationships, and I am sure I would/have had the 'but she should have known better' or 'but she should know I meant that' sort of reaction that isn't always reasonable or logical.

 

[Ylva]

Wouldn't it be Mary's fault by this logic?

Besides ... is blame the same as fault?

Blame is the thing you project at the owner of the fault?

I agree that a puzzle is different from a real life experience where emotions are involved or the confusion of reading people. I think for me confusion would come in scenarios that involve relationships, and I am sure I would/have had the 'but she should have known better' or 'but she should know I meant that' sort of reaction that isn't always reasonable or logical.

Maybe you're right. We can't tell by looking at Grace's body language whether she meant to do it, so she might as well have.