Maybe we should not strive to know what the people think in order to know them, but rather to find out which of their deeds they done during and after they think can be considered as outcomes of their thoughts.
If a deed is such an outcome, all the man could be in that deed, since the thought is the innermost part of a man.
However, our habit of seeing other people’s deeds excludes this kind of scrutiny. We do not put the question ‘Who is the author of that fact?’ only if we do not know his or her name, without thinking of someone’s identity as the author of that deed. Instead, we use to put the question: ‘what does the person x do?’
Thereafter, it seems right to suppose that that person or any person is always behind of her facts. But when a deed is not backed by a thought, it has no person behind it, being only an imitation of other people’s deeds into specific circumstances. Among the circumstances are the unspoken intentions which we commonly and falsely take as being thoughts. And when a deed is backed by a thought, the thought is wholly visible in that deed.
For instance, if we see a man deepened into meditation, we know that he succeeded to be a halt in his ongoing course of life.