Published on 12, July, 2020
Deepthought said:Milton does not suggest that non-autistic people are less capable of developing an understanding of autism than vice versa; as he points out, it is simply that autistic people have no choice but to try to develop an understanding of society if they are to ‘survive and potentially thrive’ whereas no such imperative applies in the opposite direction (Milton 2012).
The thing that makes me smile here, is Milton's and other's hypothesis that there is no imperative for non-autistic people to use an Autistic Theory-of-Mind (or AToM) ~ with my amusement arising from the fact that non-autistic and autistic parents have been having and raising autistic children for thousands of years now, and the use of an AToM or a Divergent Theory of Mind (DToM) has remained historically concurrent in all cultures and societies, therefore.
Also, societal ToM models that involve 'surviving and potentially thriving' ideologies featuring 'imperatives' are proving currently to be more and more unreliable, whereas when we live as we actually are ~ we thereby facilitate our life as it actually is in the dependable and reliable sense.
Don’t you find it a very blunt instrument of judgement though?
. said:Don’t you find it a very blunt instrument of judgement though?
If judgement is employed the blunt instrument factor can very much become the case, yes. How do you imagine its application to be like a blunt instrument in the above respect?
I agree that comprehension is what differs...
So....not quite yin and yang......it is just a matter of it you have an “inny ” or an “outy” mind!
Nicely expressed DeepThought...but again my worry is that these definitions we find so lovely because they are so neat and succinct....is life really like that?....maybe it is....it is just that I keep mucking it up! Lol
. said:So what is there understanding and what is ours?
Our understanding and theirs is the same, it is the comprehension of our shared understanding that differs.
Autistic people are more self-centric (internally centred) and their genetic and linguistic architectures are more functionally specialised, and concretely receptive.
Whilst non autistic people are more ego-centric (externally centred) and their genetic and linguistic architectures are more functionally generalised, and abstractly receptive.
. said:As a fan of Rousseau....surely we were all born equal and questioning the world and our place in it or equal footing....but I feel uncomfortable with categorisation of ND and NT and not just people......said the self diagnosed freak on the NAS forum! Lol
I use the terms NT and ND etcetera as functional descriptives, or behavioural references, rather than as references involving lesser or greater values of worth.
. said:whose judgement of the world is more real or valid?
In the legal sense, a judgement can only be made once all the evidence has been accumulated, addressed and excluding cataclysms ~ the world has a fair few million years left on the clock yet! ;-)
. said:...it is the variation of interpretation that gives us our humanity.
Or perhaps it is our humanity that gives us our interpretative variations? ~ Cause preceding effect and so fourth?
And to profess our own ignorance is one of the most important things we can do. ,.and then act upon it with an open mind
Which was either Socrates or Plato, I can't remember which - and I'm not going to check on the internet, but just profess my ignorance!
An unexamined life is not worth living......
One of the ironies of the wider availability of information that the internet has brought us is that it has, in many ways, led people into even more entrenched and polarised positions than might have been the case before. I can understand this to some extent. My natural tendency is to be attracted to people and causes that accord with my own beliefs and world-view. It gives me a sense of security and common purpose - and it bolsters my already very fragile ego. Perhaps that's the same for everyone. But when you combine that with the factor of social distance that is inherent in internet exchanges, it makes it much easier for people to eschew 'rational discussion' in favour of indignant ranting and abuse. I've been guilty of it myself. It's the same thing as when you're in a car and someone cuts you up in traffic. What happens? You shout and swear, maybe shake your fists at them. Because you're safe in your car, and they can't touch you. If you were to get out of the car and face them, however, you'd probably be far more moderate in your tone. Okay... maybe not! But you see what I mean. I think this entrenchment is a very bad thing. We only progress through discussion, acknowledgement, compromise, understanding.... and eventual acceptance. That's the essence of humanity and civilisation. Unfortunately, I see more and more people taken the other option - because it's safer and easier. It also reflects, I think, in the way that certain institutions of higher education - supposed bastions of enquiry and discussion - will ban certain speakers for fear of 'upsetting' some students.
Agreed......I am also fully aware of all my many imperfections and the closed door of other minds...do those other minds need to be open to be read first!?
. said:open mindedness is also another trait that is difficult to find.....
Yes. And whilst I have a quote from Spinoza on my desk which speaks of my intentions - 'I have striven not to laugh at human actions, not to weep at them, nor to hate them, but to understand them' - I struggle with that 'understanding' all the time on my bumpy road to enlightenment! I find certain political and spiritual positions very hard to comprehend, no matter how much I might take into consideration variations in people's genetic make-up, developmental environment and life experiences. One person born into straitened circumstances, and who benefits from the collective welfare of society, may grow up holding fast to certain political principles. Another person, similarly raised, may reject those principles altogether. On the other hand, someone born into affluence and privilege may renounce those entirely - or may be forgiven, perhaps, for not being able to understand the experiences of someone from the other end of the scale. So many variables! I do try hard to keep my mind open in that sense. But it isn't easy. I suppose, at least, I'm aware of this imperfection. Perhaps, as Socrates said (or was it Plato?), a wise man is one who knows that he knows nothing!
koffeekat9 said:So what is their understanding and what is ours? It could be anything and you can only try to gain an understanding by questioning the assumptions you have and asking someone what their understanding is.
But what questions do you ask....and you have to be receptive to others first.....open mindedness is also another trait that is difficult to find.....
your points are very true and valid...
This is why IQ tests are questionable, I think, in the sense of cultural specificity and educational background. I'm not sure that these tests can ever be truly neutral. When I took a Mensa IQ test, there were some mathematical questions that required more than either commonsense, logical reasoning or lateral thinking. With a body of mathematical knowledge that I didn't then possess, I would have scored higher.
I think it differs depending on the person and the only way you can really know is to question what someone means. That's not always welcome and may not always be practical, but just understanding that someone else may have a different interpretation of something can be sufficient in some cases.
I don't feel that I understand the complexities of the theory of mind stuff. I saw the basic Sally Anne test to determine theory of mind and I can't get my head around how that test then demonstrates that someone cannot then understand that other people have different thoughts and perceptions. It seems a leap to me. There is an underlying perception with the test that if you give one answer it means this, and you give another answer it means that. The idea that there are only two possible outcomes to the test seems fundamentally flawed to me and relies on the person who designed the tests' perception of the world as being the one true perception of the world. If that perception is not universal then surely it is a flawed test because the assumptions cannot be stated as being categorically true.
So what is their understanding and what is ours? It could be anything and you can only try to gain an understanding by questioning the assumptions you have and asking someone what their understanding is.
Most of the time my speech is 'normal', but occasionally I speak in a roundabout way, the opposite of what I mean and play the devil's advocate and other people just don't get me. I am sober while I speak like this. They consider me a weirdo and avoid me.
I still do that, though less frequently than of yore. My way of speaking to them is inappropriate to them. So be it. They can think what they like, because they certainly seem to like what they think.
Alcohol provides that conduit. It enables me to say what I couldn't otherwise say. And it can be cathartic more times than it can be embarrassing. If people take offence... it's up to them. I don't deliberately set out to offend. I simply speak my mind. The day will come when I'll have the confidence to do that sober... but not just yet.
Haven't touched alcohol since Feb 2016, when I fell out with the few people I socialised with in club.
My inappropriate/unusual/autistic way of speaking alienated them.
And, in my case, consuming several whiskies...
Similar here. Only human contact in last three days has been, a couple of text messages, some tweets, cashiers in shops.
Otherwise internet 'social' sites,. This one, photography and trip advisor.
Rest of time spent watching tv, Buffy DVDs and filling out forms.
I'll define myself by my diagnosis if I need to - and I seem to need to an awful lot. I'm sick and tired of being told 'That's not autism... we all do that', when, for instance, I'm talking about my preference for lone activities. People generally find that their conception of lone activities (a few hours by themselves watching the football) is far removed from my conception: a whole weekend indoors, alone, with no human contact except via the internet. I find myself increasingly having less and less in common with NTs. The older I get, the more I see, the more at odds with society I feel. And then I get told 'it's a generational thing.' Okay. Always got to be a reason that accords with NT perspectives...
So what is there understanding and what is ours?
Love it! Best response EVER! Loving your mind DeepThought!
Elephantintheroom wrote:
.....a silly flippant thought....as you know I can be both things....plus prone to finking!
I am more prone to extensively divergent flinking!
am I reaching an existential epiphany or just having a seizure?
If everything is making sense and your not all big and confused and surrounded by medical personnel or a crowd of concerned people ~ it could be an epiphany!
Thank you Robert. Don't overthink the connection between the femme fetale and autism!
Love the new avatar, at first I thought, Dax from star trek DS9. Now I realise it's Janet Leigh from Psycho.
Lol x
Sensational! ...... I shall return......the left corner of my paper bag is causing issues and I must away to work! Stand by your inbox....whichever you is there.....real, ideal, or spare me :)
The following is what I got in my e-mail in box and had an answer for:
Riddle me this great oracle....
does everything have to be hard earned? Is humanity watching a person wiggle out of their own wet paper bag.
Climbing a mountain may not be easy, but the hard work involved is certainly worth it ~ for those who find it as such to be. Either way, easier work is involved with it too ~ such as appreciating the progressive levels and perspectives of the views.
'Is humanity watching a person wiggle out of their own wet paper bag.'
In some ways yes, as some people watch as a person has a seizure for example, and in some ways no as some people will help quite readily, and others will walk straight on past.
"Have you reached the peak of Maslow’s mountain?"
I did not as such reach the peak of Maslow's "mountain," as I reached the peak of my mountain instead.
I did though 'reach' the steps of Maslow's 'Hierarchy' or 'Pyramid' of developmental needs, when I started studying psychology, at the end of the eighties.
As far as the Maslow model of needs goes, it is too functionally muddled and abstract for me, on account of it being all too western-modern ideology-expectation specific, and in order to save me some writing, abridging and editing energy, consider perhaps the following:
194.81.189.19/.../400
My model of 'parallel' coexisting sensibilities and needs; is as follows:
7.) Rational
6.) Sentimental
5.) Communicational
4.) Emotional
3.) Imaginal
2.) Reproductional
1,) Sensational
Carl Rogers also created a theory implicating a “growth potential” whose aim was to integrate congruently the “real self” and the “ideal self” thereby cultivating the emergence of the “fully functioning person”.
In my experience of things, I have found it more to be a case of integrating the intuitions and vitalisations of the "real self" or conscious sole ~ through the realities of the experiential selves, and as such actualise a more real or direct awareness of individual existence ~ rather than being distracted by imagining another me!!!
does everything have to be hard earned? Is humanity just the process of watching a person wiggle out of their own wet paper bag., .... .....on a serious note
Have you reached the peak of Maslow’s mountain?
”. Self-actualization, according to Maslow, represents growth of an individual toward fulfillment of the highest needs; those for meaning in life, in particular. Carl Rogers also created a theory implicating a “growth potential” whose aim was to integrate congruently the “real self” and the “ideal self” thereby cultivating the emergence of the “fully functioning person”. It was Maslow, however, who created a psychological hierarchy of needs, the fulfillment of which theoretically leads to a culmination of fulfillment of “being values”, or the needs that are on the highest level of this hierarchy, representing meaning.”
www.psychologytoday.com/.../the-theory-self-actualization
"So, DeepThought.....are you at peace with your place on this little bauble in space?"
I am content with where I am in the universe now, as I have a hard earned more or less working peace treaty on the go psychologically and physiologically.
So, DeepThought.....are you at peace with your place on this little bauble in space?
"Existential angst abounds ..."
It too will pass . . .
Elephantintheroom
Whose idea of self do i conform to? She said scratching her head? Lol
The one furthest from the mind of you and deepest in the heart of you as sparkling and scintillating the purest luminosity of you ~ perhaps?
Have I just picked the pre-packed Amazon Prime delivered, societally alpha and beta tested version of a ND woman and presented it to you in a palatable and digestible form....one ND turd, polished, presented and certainly non threatening...lol....ta da!
Existential angst abounds ...
"So a degree of individualisation is tolerated, i suppose, as long as you can still perform in the world and adhere to societal homogeneity.'
As far as 'societal homogeneity' goes, even not adhering to it, or in other words rebelling against it, is still adhering to it.
'In some ways people like this it is gives them a "rule book" in terms of the key elements to conform to and leaves spaces in between for us to add our own sprinkle of uniqueness (provided that it does not upset anyone) and provided that we still remain "useful" members of society.'
As with conforming to or rebelling against societal homogeneity, not fitting in or not remaining "useful" is always societal gold either way, given that the fame game involves the blame game, or "Live as a warning to others" and "Don't be one of them" and all that.
'However, as you allude, some people are disassociated from themselves...traumatically or maybe down to the "rules of engagement" from their particular culture.'
The trauma-disassociation factor applies for all societal members:
1.) Type ones by birth trauma just before, during or just after being born ~ labour, delivery, first breath and or all round environmental shock.
2.) Type twos on account of parent separation anxiety due as babies or as toddlers being left with others who are strangers to them (day-carers, baby-sitters and nannies etc).
and
3.) Type threes on account of social and societal inclusion and exclusion anxieties or traumas involved with education mostly, and thereafter adult socialisation, initial employment for some and familial responsibilities for a few.
'Some people may believe that they are individual but are just practicing mimicry."
Behavioural mimicry is not practised being that it is instinctual, it is behavioural modelling that is practised in terms of applying mimicked words and phrases in line with appropriate actions, objects and states of affairs in the social or surrounding environment.
An individual is always an individual in respect of whether they are presenting their naturally inherent identity, and or else an assumed identity that is socially fostered and personally adopted.
Fashion, for example, provides mass produced for us to wear and this are external indicators of wealth and compliance....external badges of what "camp" or tribe we belong to - i.e. Goth, Hippie, Punk, Skinhead...and then customise these again with a layer of our individuality....a tattoo, a safety pin etc.
Yeah, definitely.
no wonder people just worn out trying to understand others!! :)
Totally, know thy self.
Deepthought said:
What individuality actually is though ~ is not all that well considered by many, as they are traumatically disassociated from themselves, and thereby habitually pretending to be who they imagine they are, who they'd like to be, or who they are not.
Oddly enough, most people do not really like this state of affairs, in that, "Everybody has to do it and so must you do it too!" way of things. All big and jolly, "It's tradition you know!" or all big and not jolly. "Or else!!!"
So a degree of individualisation is tolerated, i suppose, as long as you can still perform in the world and adhere to societal homogeneity. In some ways people like this it is gives them a "rule book" in terms of the key elements to conform to and leaves spaces in between for us to add our own sprinkle of uniqueness (provided that it does not upset anyone) and provided that we still remain "useful" members of society.
However, as you allude, some people are disassociated from themselves...traumatically or maybe down to the "rules of engagement" from their particular culture. Some people may believe that they are individual but are just practicing mimicry.
Fashion, for example, provides mass produced costumes for us to wear and this are external indicators of wealth and compliance....external badges of what "camp" or tribe we belong to - i.e. Goth, Hippie, Punk, Skinhead...and then customise these again with a layer of our individuality....a tattoo, a safety pin etc.
. said:Would not even labotonmisation cure individualism?
Nope, not even a lobotomy, for by removing or damaging parts of the brain, only autonomous functioning is restricted, and autonomous experience and awareness remains constant ~ from four and half months gestation time, until the last breath.
. said:Does the swamp of media fed, consumerism fed NT folk still class as “individuals”.
I would state that all the 'swathes' of media and consumerism led NT folk are always individuals, whether they be individuals singularly alone, or individuals collectively together.
It matters not what has been taken from the brain or put into the mind of an individual, it is still the brain and mind of an individual in each and every case experientially for them, as also being as we are equals.
. said:....or even our herd mentality to scuttle under rocks and not be recognised as of worth negate scope for individualisation.
Well herd mentality supports or restricts scope for individualisation, more in some cases and less in others, yet it is still in each and every case that an individual is as such being socially supported or restricted.
. said:....in a society that only just muster the effort to generalise...(yes, I ate my own words),..we are yet to celebrate individualism...too scared to, so just conform....instead....
As far as stating that we do not as a society celebrate individualism, the greater and the lesser majority of people do celebrate a 'collectively' shared and enforced 'ideal' of what individualism is assumed to be, in societal-behavioural terms.
Pretending to be who we are or who we or others think we should be, becomes rather a strain through the course of life for each neurological type, and psychological issues ensue from preadolescent to post adolescent life stage crisisies, breakdowns and so on into the realms of insanity, senility and so fourth.
This collective psychological wounding and maiming will improve with a lot less of the "Or else!!!" phobia inducing behavioural imperative involved, which to a small extent is beneficial, yet much more so is a greater recollection that defaming and humiliating people because of age, gender and culture is excessively costly and damaging.
When more people learn to internally recycle their emotional turmoil instead of externally redirecting it at other people ~ that will be breath of fresh air, and in terms of being autistic or 'self-centric' ~ we are more predisposed to it just as non-autistic people are more predisposed to socialising.
I hope soon to come is a more generalised sense that there are different types of empathy for each neurological type, and just as is the case with different languages ~ some people comprehend more and others less. I hope also that those who have yet to learn are cherished equally as much as those who have learnt ~ all being equal.
Would not even labotonmisation cure individualism? Does the swamp of media fed, consumerism fed NT folk still class as “individuals”. ....or even our herd mentality to scuttle under rocks and not be recognised as of worth negate scope for individualisation.....in a society that only just muster the effort to generalise...(yes, I ate my own words),..we are yet to celebrate individualism...too scared to, so just conform....instead....
i think I will launch a colour me Aspie colouring book....colour my mummy/wife/daughter etc whilst passively absorbing in a non aggressive or threatening way its meaning or implications...:)
loving the “bants”
. said:Lol....delusions of superiority indeed!!...
Yeah, I nearly fell off the floor laughing when I read it.
Limbic sublimation therapy through laughter really helps shift delusions of superiority ~ as are but one range of presentations involving ''Inferiority Complex'' proper, what with delusions of mediocrity and inferiority being the other two ranges of presentation, just as much integrally.
The thing that made me laugh the most though ~ There is no known cure. I mean a cure for individuality ~ oh my whole life on this planet that makes me laugh.
. said:thank you for offering a “pretty” version of the women with ASD checklist....is that to make it more palatable!
Oh its got little to do with making it more 'palatable' ~ emotional (think of the sweet looking Aspie child) bribery all the way!