>> "Aren't most people just failed social actors who are rather poor at picking the signs in which to display their emotional communication?"
> which was the part that really rubbed me the wrong way.
But, aren't they?
Not actor in the sense of a script/a lie, but in the sense of trying, ultimately imperfectly, to convey how we feel to the world around us?
How often do you think you nail the perfect smile, the perfect handshake, the perfect snuggle, to demonstrate happiness, but not too much, familiarity and strength without being overbearing, and tenderness without clinging?
Combine that with the imperfect feedback you get from others and we have really have no idea about the finer details of anyone but yourself.
Not just that you can't detect lies but that we have no way of telling if our perceptions of red are the same, let alone a hug or a complex thought.
You're right and have a point - the question is, do our imperfect expressions of emotion somehow rob them of their reality, intent, or genuineness?
It seems to me (perhaps this is a misreading of the post) would have us dismiss emotional expression as inherently untrustworthy, or somehow unreal. I disagree vehemently.
Sure, our expressions, and the way they're perceived, is colored by brain chemistry, social conditioning, and a myriad of other factors... but I maintain that it simply makes them more complex, not less real.
Certainly it would not justify something as cynical as this:
> "Aren't most people just failed social actors who are rather poor at picking the signs in which to display their emotional communication?"
which was the part that really rubbed me the wrong way.