Ian Leslie, writing for The Guardian, tells the story of how Italian police relied on Amanda Knox's facial expressions to decide that she was stone-cold, demon-driven killer. He also hilariously points out the obvious:
The eyes, it is said, are windows to the soul. They are not. They are organs for converting light into electro-magnetic impulses. But this has never stopped us dreaming of them that way.
I've never viewed eyes as being windows to anything. They lie because we aren't reading the other person in them, we're reading ourselves. People think after the fact that Ted Bundy looked like a serial killer, but did they think that before they knew it about him? No. He came across as charming. In the Guardian piece, Leslie quotes Emily Pronin, a psychologist from Princeton, who notes that when we talk to each other, what stands out for each person is their own thoughts and the other person's face. She says that we judge others by what we see in that face while judging ourselves by what we feel.
Most of what we see in faces, it seems, is what we decide we'll see.
Faces are distracting to me. I start thinking too much about whether I am staring too hard, so I look away. Then I think looking away is probably odd, so then I look back, and then I think again that I'm probably staring too hard. Also, teeth and eyes and things on the faces or little things about the hair or ears or eyebrows distract, as well, and I'm always also wondering if the person to whom I'm talking wonders why I'm staring at their scalp instead of at their...what? Eyes? (By the way, have you ever tried looking into two eyes at once? Can't be done).
So, I don't try to read faces. What's to read? A smile that didn't quite make the truth register? I think people are culturally and evolutionarily conditioned to smile all the time when they don't mean it...after all, showing teeth that way is conciliatory, it means, "I'm not gonna get into it with you. I'm nice. Really." Tone of voice can tell me more than a face, especially if it's insincere and exaggerated. I'm from Texas, I've got a lifetime of experience with that one. "How are you?!? It's great to see yoooou!" Mmmhmmm.
Instead, I listen to the voice, the words, and any dissonance inherent in the situation, like just being thrilled beyond all measure to see someone you've met briefly maybe twice before. If situation, words, tone, and level of expression don't rationally interrelate, I'll suspect that I'm in the presence of some serious insincerity, if not outright lying. It's not what's in the face. It's how it all fits together. In this case, rational consideration of all of the elements may well trump some kind of "social intuition" factor that some people think they have.
And that leaves me wondering if people like the investigators described in that piece should move over so those who don't let faces interfere with social interpretation can have a go at it. The socially challenged Spocks of the world, unassailed by specific attention to misleading expressions, might prove to be a little better at these things, ironically. In fact, as I type that, a prominent character who fits that description comes immediately to mind: the world's most famous detective, Sherlock Holmes.
2 comments:
"Instead, I listen to the voice, the words, and any dissonance inherent in the situation, like just being thrilled beyond all measure to see someone you've met briefly maybe twice before. If situation, words, tone, and level of expression don't rationally interrelate, I'll suspect that I'm in the presence of some serious insincerity, if not outright lying. It's not what's in the face. It's how it all fits together. In this case, rational consideration of all of the elements may well trump some kind of "social intuition" factor that some people think they have."
And Simon Baron-Cohen says that human behavior can't be systemitized. Methinks he hasn't studied enough of it. Or he's over-reliant on his own presumed but never challenged "empathy" as opposed to thinking critically about human behavior. Or he's never taken an acting or script analysis class in his life (which is where I learned exactly what you said above, and more).
I read somewhere also that it's been found (apologies that I can't cite a source) that people from marginalized or threatened minorities simply *spend more time thinking* about human behavior, out of survival necessity. Accordingly, I've often known autistic people to be waaaay more savvy about picking up on stuff like this. It's pretty stunning to me sometimes when *I* have to explain to an allistic person why someone isn't trustworthy, or how I know that something's wrong in a situation.
"people from marginalized or threatened minorities simply *spend more time thinking* about human behavior, out of survival necessity"
God knows, I've spent almost every moment of every interaction with people--except my family and most intimate friends--thinking about exactly that.
Post a Comment