How Might Simulation-Based Accounts of Mindreading Explain Pragmatic Interpretation?

Abstract

This paper examines the role of simulational mindreading in pragmatic interpretation (conceived of in a Gricean manner). There are two parts to this paper. In part one, I argue that mirroring, in the form of direct or indirect simulation, underdetermines pragmatic interpretation. Nevertheless, to deliver a unique interpretation, mirroring can contribute either by reducing the number of salient interpretations or to be accompanied by theoretical considerations. This results in a hybrid view in which theory and simulation cooperate. The second part of the paper examines the imaginative or perspective-taking sense of simulation. Drawing on evidence from several clinical populations, I will show that subjects with difficulty in pragmatic interpretation often show little or no difficulty in perspective taking, and subjects with difficulty in perspective taking do not always show difficulty in pragmatic interpretation. This, I conclude, suggests that simulation in the sense of perspective taking is not necessary or plays no significant role in pragmatic interpretation.