Abstract

Mentalization has developed through different waves and its definition has gradually changed. Through this process mentalization theorists have not taken a particular position on the philosophical underpinnings of the understanding of others, except that Theory of Mind (ToM) is referred to as a commonsense and underlying theoretical basis. It is apparent that ToM does not explain all dimensions of Mentalization Theory (MT), especially implicit mentalization, and theorists do not account for how implicit mentalization can be captured in interaction. In this article we explain the divergence between MT and ToM and the lack of a philosophical basis for the process of understanding others in MT. We show that conversation analysis (CA) can be used to capture implicit mentalization in interaction. We argue that MT needs a theoretical and philosophical formulation about what constitutes intersubjectivity and the process of understanding others. We suggest that phenomenology could inhabit this space.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.