Abstract
The paper deals with John Lachs's criticism of the notion of 'a certain blindness in human beings,' coined by William James in eponymous essay. James's essay aims at human incurable inability to understand mental states of others.
Lachs argues that however unfortunate, the 'human blindness' is in fact a blessing in disguise when it comes to practical problem solving. In my paper, I attempt to distinguish between the cognitive and moral side of the human blindness, and claim against Lachs that disregarding moral consequences, overcoming human blindness is always a cognitive advantage in practical problem solving.
Moreover, I trace the sources of human blindness to two sorts of human psychological limitations: the qualitative limitation of the egocentric predicament, and the quantitative limitation of the narrowness of consciousness. At the end of my essay, I propose ways which other philosophical schools suggested for overcoming of the human blindness.