The ability to socialize in early life depends on developing commonalities with others. But what exactly constitutes the “sense of us” or the “we-perspective”? The interaction theory (IT) offers an attractive alternative to mindreading theories, such as theory-theory (TT) and simulation theory (ST), by presenting a further development of enactivism. During embodied interactions, individuals “directly” and “smartly” perceive the mental states of others. Despite the intuitive appeal of direct acquaintance with others’ mental states, IT relies on crude metaphors. We aim to retain IT’s core intuition—the embodied, embedded, enactive, and affective interaction—within a new framework. First, we introduce Piccinini’s key notion of situated neural representations, which fills the gaps that IT leaves behind. Second, we adopt Nicolelis’s concept of “brainets”. When one animal observes another’s behavior, their brains synchronize by simulating the same means to achieve similar goals. We then interpret brainets as situated neural representations: embodied, embedded, enactive, and affective.
In humans, the development of social cognition, or the ability to establish social contacts, begins in infancy and relies on building a common basis with others through behaviors such as exchanging gaze, face-to-face interactions, joint attention, etc. As adults, we navigate social interactions based on norms. This challenge, known as social cognition, explores how we comprehend and engage with others in everyday encounters. But what exactly is the primitive “sense of us” or the…
˜
Click here to download full article