Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Understanding Other MindsPerspectives from developmental social neuroscience$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Simon Baron-Cohen, Michael Lombardo, and Helen Tager-Flusberg

Print publication date: 2013

Print ISBN-13: 9780199692972

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2013

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199692972.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 21 March 2019

Teleology

Teleology

Belief as perspective

Chapter:
(p.35) Chapter 3 Teleology
Source:
Understanding Other Minds
Author(s):

Johannes Roessler

Josef Perner

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199692972.003.0003

In this chapter we compare and contrast three conceptions of commonsense-psychological explanations of intentional actions: theory theory, simulation theory, and teleology. We elaborate, and make a case for, a teleological account, and argue that it can help to shed light on a number of central issues in current theory of mind research, including the nature of belief understanding and the dissociation between young children’s performance of ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ false-belief tasks. Central to our argument are two distinctions. First, we distinguish between a more simple-minded and a more sophisticated conception of intentional actions: ‘pure teleology’ takes actions to be explained by the (typically non-psychological) facts that provide agents with reasons for action; ‘teleology-in-perspective’ makes sense of intentional actions in terms of the agent’s propositional attitudes (i.e. her perspective on her reasons). Second, we contrast two forms of action understanding: explicit and implicit. The dissociation between different measures of belief understanding, we argue, is best explained by the hypothesis that young children’s explicit understanding of intentional action is a matter of ‘pure teleology’, and that their success on ‘indirect’ tests reflects an implicit non-teleological theory of behaviour.

Keywords:   Theory of mind, action explanation, concept of belief, false-belief tests, mental simulation, teleology, perspective problems, implicit vs explicit cognition

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .