About the "How are you?" question

It is pointless to either ask or answer the question, because no meaningful information is transferred. In parts of America, the way that someone usually responds to "how are you?" is to say "how are you" back, and neither party gets an answer at all, even a meaningless one. It's just a greeting like "hello" or "hey".

DragonCat16 said:

It is pointless to either ask or answer the question, because no meaningful information is transferred.

Not quite pointless, being that the tonal qualities of the answer serve as an indicator as to whether the answer is actually the case, and if not it allows people to gauge if they and the other person want to further address the underlying issue.

DragonCat16 said:

In parts of America, the way that someone usually responds to "how are you?" is to say "how are you" back, and neither party gets an answer at all, even a meaningless one. It's just a greeting like "hello" or "hey".

Where I am in the UK, in the same sense as the USA, I have found that saying in the phonetic sense "Hull-low" quite useful ~ as it is a neutral statement that is likewise responded to without further complications in having to converse.

I say "Hull-low" from the basis of a ship having a full bounty, or payload, as gives the expression a more positive emotional effect. It serves as such then also as a well wishing statement :-)

DragonCat16 said:

It is pointless to either ask or answer the question, because no meaningful information is transferred.

Not quite pointless, being that the tonal qualities of the answer serve as an indicator as to whether the answer is actually the case, and if not it allows people to gauge if they and the other person want to further address the underlying issue.

DragonCat16 said:

In parts of America, the way that someone usually responds to "how are you?" is to say "how are you" back, and neither party gets an answer at all, even a meaningless one. It's just a greeting like "hello" or "hey".

Where I am in the UK, in the same sense as the USA, I have found that saying in the phonetic sense "Hull-low" quite useful ~ as it is a neutral statement that is likewise responded to without further complications in having to converse.

I say "Hull-low" from the basis of a ship having a full bounty, or payload, as gives the expression a more positive emotional effect. It serves as such then also as a well wishing statement :-)

Excellent! I can substitute Sheldon's "My brain is better than everyone's!!" with "My spinal cord and neurological integrations are better than everyone's!!". It might not have the same ring to it but, I like it!   

Endymion said:

I wonder then if my spinal cord is either a shrunken husk or is it so vitally healthy and well oiled that it doesn't require this "two-stroke". Maybe I'm synthesising engine oil and don't need this addition (?).  

As autistic Neuro-Divergent types, our 'spinal cords' and neurological integrations are more integrally resilient, or robust, and hence the narrow range of specialised interests thing.

I wonder then if my spinal cord is either a shrunken husk or is it so vitally healthy and well oiled that it doesn't require this "two-stroke". Maybe I'm synthesising engine oil and don't need this addition (?).  

DragonCat16 said:

It just seems like a lot of effort for no great return on investment, and possible negative consequences if I don't perform well, so I will actually avoid approaching people I know, and make myself look as if I am concentrating on something really important when I see them approaching me, so they won't feel the need to engage in fake and very uncomfortable pleasantries with me.

Well, the investment involves societal procedures and rituals, as allows people to feel that they are a part of the social collective, or at least an aspect of it, but without necessarily having to disclose any personal information.

This involves the 'Game of Together', in Transactional Analysis, with the 'game' being a socially ritualised 'pretence' involving the verbal 'pleasantries' ~ as being stimulation and therefore 'maintenance' of the nervous system. So basically a psychological and a physiological 'keeping-fit' session.

Eric Berne, in his 1964 book, the GAMES PEOPLE PLAY, on pages 34 to 35, described the basics of which as being:

Of more significance as an introduction to game analysis are informal rituals, and among the most instructive are the American greeting rituals.

!A: 'Hi!' (Hello, good morning.)

!B: 'Hi! (Hello, good morning.)

2A: 'Warm enough for ya?' (How are you?)

2B: "Sure is. Looks like rain, though.' (Fine. How are you?)

3A: 'Well, take care yourself.' (Okay.)

3B: 'I'll be seeing you.'

4A: 'So long.'

4B: 'So long.'

It is apparent that this exchange is not intended to convey information. Indeed, if there is any information, it is wisely withheld. It might take Mr A fifteen minutes to say how he is is, and Mr B, who is only the most casual acquaintance, has no intention of devoting that much time to listening to him. This series of transactions is quite adequately characterised by calling it an 'eight-stroke ritual'. If A and B were in a hurry, they might both be contented with a two-stroke exchange, Hi-Hi. If they were old-fashioned Oriental potentates, they might go through a two-hundred stroke ritual before settling down to business. Meanwhile, in the jargon of transactional analysis, A and B have improved each other's health slightly; for the moment, at least, 'their spinal cords won't shrivel up', and each is accordingly grateful.

Deepthought said:

Not quite pointless, being that the tonal qualities of the answer serve as an indicator as to whether the answer is actually the case, and if not it allows people to gauge if they and the other person want to further address the underlying issue.

I think I have to disagree with you here. In my experience, 99.9% of the time, people say "how are you" only as a greeting and not as a question. When I was younger and much more naive, I would answer the question honestly, and then I would wonder why the reaction I would get was one of obvious annoyance. Nobody wants to address the underlying issue; they simply want to get on with their day. I suppose the exception would be close friends or family members, but then they would likely say something other than "how are you" as a greeting anyway.

It is true that people make an evaluation of one's response to "how are you", though: if you fail to answer at all, they label you as antisocial and never speak to you again unless they have to; if you reply honestly, they label you as weird, and never speak to you again unless they have to, going so far as actually avoiding you as if you have some sort of communicable disease; only if you respond in one of the approved neurotypical ways (e.g. put on a fake smile and say something very positive in a friendly voice, or return the greeting with exactly the same tone as that in which it was initiated) can you pass the test.

It just seems like a lot of effort for no great return on investment, and possible negative consequences if I don't perform well, so I will actually avoid approaching people I know, and make myself look as if I am concentrating on something really important when I see them approaching me, so they won't feel the need to engage in fake and very uncomfortable pleasantries with me.