In psychology, there exists the area of cognitive science called the philosophy of mind.  This area of psychology, often referred to as the neurosciences, performs studies to discern how one person understands and interrelates with another person (Gallagher, 2001, par. 1).  The goal of this understanding is to understand specific brain functions and surmise how the mind actually works.  One area of philosophy of mind is called simulation theory.  It is this theory that allows us to understand how the brain functions and whether or not individuals are capable of predicting or simulating the cognitive functions of the mind of another person.  While this is a very complex issue, it is impossible for any person or group to accurately simulate the mind due to variables and the impreciseness of guessing.

To begin, it is important to understand the true meaning of simulation theory as it related to the philosophy of mind.  Simulation theory argues that one does not theorize about the other person but uses one’s own mental experience as an internal model for the other mind (Gallagher, 2001, par. 1).  Simulation theory is the second of two theories associated with philosophy of mind; the first is called theory theory whereby a person attempts to guess what another individual is going to think, feel, or act in a specific situation based on what is known about that person (par. 1).  Theory theory makes it very difficult to exact preciseness in philosophy of mind and attempting to simulate the cognitive functions of the mind; therefore, scientists prefer to use simulation theory instead.  The simulation theory provides that one person will attempt to put themselves in the position of the other person and through a series of cognitive processes, attempt to predict what the person will do based on what they, themselves would do in the situation.  For instance, in the game of football many coaches attempt to guess what the other coach will call for the next play based on what he would do in the same situation.

Furthermore, simulation theory allows us to examine behavioral predictions and emotional predictions that could be applied in many different fields such as law, economics, or social sciences.  “Embodied simulation can play an explanatory role not only on low-level mechanisms of social cognition—like those involved in empathy—but also on its more sophisticated aspects—like the attribution of mental states to others, and language” (Gallese, 2007, p. 659).  This allows for an additional understanding of simulation theory in that it attempts to literally attribute specific mental states to individuals where mind simulation is being attempted.  Mental states may include a person’s mood or feelings, or it could also relate to a person’s previous experiences and the behavioral choices that person would choose given prior knowledge.  With this aspect of simulation theory, there is a clear interconnection between the two theories of philosophy of mind.  In order to properly discuss and analyze potential behavior choices, mental states, or feelings individuals must have a clear understanding of the person’s cognitive habitual patterns in order to make such a guess on behavior.

Herein lies the problem with simulation theory: although the theory is practiced and maintains a strong position within the neurosciences and philosophy of mind, there are too many problems that can arise when guessing what a person’s mind will choose to do.  We may be able to analyze the firing of neurons and the ability of a person to collect and analyze data, but we cannot accurately assume to know what a person will do in a given situation.  Simulation theory and theory theory are nowhere near accurate enough to be able to predict a person’s behavior or mental processes in complex situations.  There may be a behavioral trend that is based on common sense.  For instance, if an individual places their hand on a hot plate, the person will pull their hand away from the plate in pain.  The sensory nerves in the fingers sent a message to the brain that forced a fight or flight reaction to protect the body from being burned.  This is a reaction, not a behavior that a person chooses to perform.  Choice becomes the major problem in simulating the mind because no person can ever truly understand the choices at hand, the value a person has placed in each choice, and how the person views the consequences of acting out the individual choices.  These variables make it impossible to ever accurately assume that we know what a person will do, even if we believe that we have studied enough tests to predict the possibilities.