Always being right

Also I’ve come to the conclusion that autistic people argue differently than non-autistic people. A lot of us seem to be bottom up thinkers. We start with small details and move upwards towards the big picture step-by-step. Where is a lot of non-autistic people tend to start with the big picture & general trends and themes and try to distract them into smaller parts piece by piece.

so suppose there is an autistic person who thinks the answer is A and a non-autistic person thinks the answer is B. Well the autistic person has probably reached the conclusion A by building up from lots of small details and he won’t be convinced to change his opinion on A unless someone goes into the small details with him and argues them out one by one. And if someone does argue those small details with him and managers to change his opinion  on one or two of those small details he won’t suddenly switch his position to B. Instead he’ll rerun his previous reasoning and probably come up with some new variation of A, A* for example. because after all you’ve only persuaded him on one or two small details.

and from the non-autistic persons point of view that’s very frustrating because it looks like changing the goal  posts in the argument. But from the autistic persons point of view it’s really helpful because you’ve helped them improve their understanding of the world you’ve helped them find a more precise and nuanced understanding of how the details fit together.

Sherlock Holmes talks about how logician could infer the existence of oceans from a drop of water. Douglas Adams talks about deep thought starting with ‘I think therefore I am’ and moving up to the existence of income tax and rice pudding from first principles. I think autistic people often do you prefer that mode of thinking.

where as the Neurotypical person sees a lot of B type things and some unknown answer to a problem that is nestled amongst all those B type things and thinks ‘oh the solution must be a B type thing.’

I think that’s very much one of the main distinctions between autistic and non-autistic people. an autistic person tends to focus on the discrepancies between patterns. Neurotypical people tend to see the commonalities in patterns. given a lot of B type things the first thing The Neurotypical person notices is ‘isn’t there a lot of B.’ Whereas the autistic persons eye is immediately drawn to the handful of A’s scattered among the predominant B.

given 100 repetitions of the same experiment that are absolutely Rigorous in execution and control if one experiment gives an anomalous result the autistic person’s first response is to say what happened there whereas the non-autistic person is overjoyed that they have a 99% success rate improving their hypothesis.

I would argue this makes autistic people really good at picking out those special cases where things buck the trend. Of course it also means it can take them quite a long time to come to conclusions that to  other people might seem like really obvious common sense because they do have  to work through all the details before they can be sure of the answer.

Also I’ve come to the conclusion that autistic people argue differently than non-autistic people. A lot of us seem to be bottom up thinkers. We start with small details and move upwards towards the big picture step-by-step. Where is a lot of non-autistic people tend to start with the big picture & general trends and themes and try to distract them into smaller parts piece by piece.

so suppose there is an autistic person who thinks the answer is A and a non-autistic person thinks the answer is B. Well the autistic person has probably reached the conclusion A by building up from lots of small details and he won’t be convinced to change his opinion on A unless someone goes into the small details with him and argues them out one by one. And if someone does argue those small details with him and managers to change his opinion  on one or two of those small details he won’t suddenly switch his position to B. Instead he’ll rerun his previous reasoning and probably come up with some new variation of A, A* for example. because after all you’ve only persuaded him on one or two small details.

and from the non-autistic persons point of view that’s very frustrating because it looks like changing the goal  posts in the argument. But from the autistic persons point of view it’s really helpful because you’ve helped them improve their understanding of the world you’ve helped them find a more precise and nuanced understanding of how the details fit together.

Sherlock Holmes talks about how logician could infer the existence of oceans from a drop of water. Douglas Adams talks about deep thought starting with ‘I think therefore I am’ and moving up to the existence of income tax and rice pudding from first principles. I think autistic people often do you prefer that mode of thinking.

where as the Neurotypical person sees a lot of B type things and some unknown answer to a problem that is nestled amongst all those B type things and thinks ‘oh the solution must be a B type thing.’

I think that’s very much one of the main distinctions between autistic and non-autistic people. an autistic person tends to focus on the discrepancies between patterns. Neurotypical people tend to see the commonalities in patterns. given a lot of B type things the first thing The Neurotypical person notices is ‘isn’t there a lot of B.’ Whereas the autistic persons eye is immediately drawn to the handful of A’s scattered among the predominant B.

given 100 repetitions of the same experiment that are absolutely Rigorous in execution and control if one experiment gives an anomalous result the autistic person’s first response is to say what happened there whereas the non-autistic person is overjoyed that they have a 99% success rate improving their hypothesis.

I would argue this makes autistic people really good at picking out those special cases where things buck the trend. Of course it also means it can take them quite a long time to come to conclusions that to  other people might seem like really obvious common sense because they do have  to work through all the details before they can be sure of the answer.

A lot of it has to do with our society weaponising grief and bereavement.

This obsession with Trauma Therapy created an awful lot of psychobabble, and junk philosophy, created by American Universities. Prime example being someone in your family with cancer. Suddenly everyone else, in the family, is held prisoner.