I did not understand how this argument should sound.
The article reads as follows: On this way of thinking, mental states are taken to be inner states of an individual that provide the best explanation of the behavior we observe in others.
I didn't get it a bit.
That is, the internal mental states of one person best explain the behavior of other people? Why is it not mentioned here that other people have minds?
Can someone explain this?
How does the argument of the best explanation in favor of other minds sound?