The Carcass Near the Gift Shop:
An acquaintance, Anita, tells him that she knows just how he feels. No one can know how anyone else feels. But here lies the paradox. If he claims that she cannot know how he feels, he is necessarily making an assertion about how she feels!
His position is self-defeating. If he is right, he is wrong. While it will be claimed by logical purists that this is not a genuine paradox, it does qualify as a paradox in a broader, less technical sense.
We have two contrary claims that both seem to be true. One is widely accepted, and the other is the conclusion of a seemingly sound argument.
The first is intuitively true — no one can ever know how another person feels or thinks. After all, everyone is unique and has unique experiences, and further, it does not seem possible for any person to have epistemic access to the thoughts and feelings of another.
The second deductively follows from the first — since no one knows how anyone else feels, no one can know that others have not had identical feelings.
To deny that empathy is possible is a problem, since it is highly valued in the fields of ethics, medicine, education, and elsewhere. Without empathy for others, it is not clear why we would ever be motivated by anything other than selfishness. Indeed, a person with a complete lack of empathy might rightly be classified as an amoral sociopath.
Empathy enables teachers and other educators to grasp the particular problems and needs of students. To presume to know how another person feels is to strip that person of his or her separateness and uniqueness. It is especially offensive to people who have been victims of one form or another of oppression when members of the privileged group claim to know how they feel.
For example, Diana Meyers states: If so, he might think that no matter how she feels, it must be different than how he feels. Or does he mean that she has no idea how he feels? In other words, that she does not have an adequate understanding of his mental state.
Regardless of which sort of claim Hector is making, the logic of that claim falls apart. But what reason could he possibly give? Therefore, he does not have access to her mind either.
Sadly, his only recourse would seem to be to appeal to the notion that since every person is unique, no two people can ever feel exactly the same way or understand precisely how the other feels.
Well, once again, we can ask him for evidence. It might be argued that no proof is needed to establish that uniqueness between all humans entails the impossibility of any two people feeling precisely the same way. It could be claimed, in other words, that it is necessarily true that no two people could have identical feelings.
But that is a tautology. While the fact that people are unique establishes that the sums of their feelings would differ, it does not entail that two people cannot have identical feelings with regard to some specific issue.
So, can Hector prove that Anita and he cannot have a single identical thought? Can Hector establish that since people are necessarily unique, it is impossible for them to have an identical thought with regard to some certain subject or issue? No, since proving such a claim would once again require access to the mind of another.
If Hector is only claiming that Anita does not know his exact state of mind, then one wonders why he would speak up in the first place.I very much doubt that reading the complete and precise state of a given human mind at a given time will ever be possible.
Perhaps a good approximation will be achievable, but I expect even this would involve destruction of the brain in the process.
being with someone you know well, and care about deeply team play-- a sense of being part of the team more than being yourself, or in the cast of a play really intense, good conversation ; Emerson quote, oversoul "In all conversation between two persons tacit reference is made, as to a .
You can teach yourself to read minds in 10 minutes flat with tips from a leading psychic! “Don’t say you can’t do it – because you can do it,” declared Kiran Behara.
“Friends, family member, even strangers on the street, will be an open book for you. While telepathy sounds like a superpower, reading someone’s mind is actually a skill that can be learned. From anticipating the needs of a client to knowing how to approach your boss, developing.
In regards to directly reading someone’s mind (as in psychically) the word you’re looking for is ‘telepathy’. However, if you’re referring to the ability to infer another person’s thoughts simply by reading their body language and facial expressions, the term you’d use is ‘empathetic accuracy’.
From time to time people have wondered why reading is important. There seems so many other things to do with one's time. Reading is important for a variety of reasons.