Confidence and Honesty

Post Reply New Topic

I agree with this man but only to a certain extent. With respect to practicing one has to have the knowledge be as correct as possible. What good is practicing something if the practicing is based upon faulty and erroneous instruction?

I have philosophical issues with what this man says about us being the captain of our own ship and masters of our own fate. Again I agree but it is to certain extents. He is using a metaphor and I will illustrate my issues with using a different variation on his metaphor. I am using my own metaphor. One can only captain his own ship under certain constraints like having a compentent and healthy crew, the ship and its components is in proper working order, the ship is well stocked with supplies, basic knowledge of how one controls the ship, etc.

I believe it was Francis Bacon said "nature to be commanded must be obeyed" This means in order to do certain things one has to have knowledge about how to do them or the understanding of the rules, nature and constraints behind these things.

One can practice and if he is practicing wrong what good is practicing wrong unless it leads him to the correct way and knowing and understanding the fundamentals of the nature behind it?

For example, momsparky had her son do long division without a calculator except to check his work. He had a meltdown because he had no idea to do long division. momsparky was able to get to his nature of what the issue was and was able to provide instruction. Because of her instruction I bet her son has more confidence to do long division without a calculator.

The problem I see with videos such as this is one's attitude seems to be overplayed and one's knowledge and ability seems to be downplayed.

I may be misinterpreting again due to my own pragmatic issues. If I am will someone please show me. I am 34 now and I probably have 34 years worth pragmatic issues. This is why I come here and I love this community. I still do have a lot of knowledge seeking and practicing to do.

I do believe I am able to do a lot of things but I lack prequisite skills, knowledge and conceptual understanding behind them. I have gained a lot by being here but I still have a long way to go. I made a major breakthrough with my understanding of necessary vs sufficient conditions. This has helped me to show me my erroneous thinking of a college degree being a sufficient condition for obtaining a job. I made the assumption that all forms of necessary conditions were sufficient conditions when this is not always the case. I believe a lot of college students did this as well and they were more likely NT. This is a major breakthrough because I can start letting this go now and start moving forward.

My college experience and the workplace has made be a huge proponent of teaching more critical thinking in elementary, middle and high schools. Personally, I think the schools need to focus less on talent discovery and more on talent development.

Last edited by cubedemon6073 on 12 Apr 2013, 12:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Awesome! Is your husband AS or NT?

My opinion: There are people who sell "self-help" guides or systems. That does not mean that they know what they are talking about even if they have a Ph.d next to their name. Some of it is no better than snake oil, and you have to use those important critical thinking skills to evaluate whether you think there is something to be learned or not from a given product.

A lot of these systems take hard knowledge and skills as a constant, and do not talk about improving hard knowledge. Why? Because those are relatively harder for NTs to acquire (most of the time) than the other things they are hyping. They are trying to sell most of these things to NTs, and often a particular subset of NT that is looking for something that looks easy. So they talk about things that NTs feel like they can improve in a relatively short time with little effort other than plunking down money for it. So they emphasize acting like you know something and faking it rather than actually learning it. They teach people to skate by with social skills because for many NTs social skills, are often less intimidating to learn. Also the self-help person can sell their books and videos to a broader market than one particular industry with a particular knowledge base.

I am not at all saying these soft skills are not important. They absolutely are, which is why even NTs are willing pay to learn them. Who you know and how you shmooze can get you things in an NT world. Charm works. It doesn't mean someone who gets a job based on soft skills can necessarily keep it, if they do not have the hard knowledge to do it. However, soft skills help land jobs and promotions and allows one to reap the rewards of being "liked."

In reference to confidence, looking at this through an NT American prism (other cultures may have other rules) if you do not act like you know what you know, people will automatically assume you know little. The notion is that if you don't think you know your stuff why should anyone disbelieve you. Again, this does not mean 100% knowledge. It means the amount of knowledge needed for the average person to do the job competently. People (not necessarily accurately) in this culture, will tend to believe that confidence correlates with knowledge unless proven otherwise. (Unless you fake confidence very badly-and are obviously overselling yourself-and then people will think you look foolish.)

This is probably why your dad says to act (authentically)confident. Having too high a standard of knowledge for yourself will undermine your presentation to others because you will be undervaluing and underselling yourself. Humility is necessary in certain contexts, but not to the point of undermining credibility. For example, admitting mistakes is fine and expected, but not doing so in a way that appears pathetic and incompetent.

The thing is though I can't be authentically confident yet. Even though I have gained a lot more info by talking to my father and those on here I still have major gaps missing to my understanding of how the workplace works and exactly what I was supposed to do when I graduated college. The main issue I ran into after graduation was that all IT jobs required multiple skills and each skill required years of experience. What exactly was I supposed to do and what procedures was I supposed to take? What exactly did I do wrong?

My husband has Aspie traits but is more ADD then Aspie.

Knowing how things work in the work world is hard. So much of what you are supposed to do is "common sense" or implied. Even in IT I think there are more social requirements than there used to be, or it seems so, anyway, but I think it depends on the workplace. You need to find a job that is described as "entry level as opposed to one that requires years of experience. This is not so easy, depending on the job market where you are.

Did you graduate college, or are your IT skills self-taught? If you went to college, you could try your college's alumni office for help in your job search. Colleges often have resources on interviewing and resume advice and may have job leads through other people who went to your school.

I sent this to my uncle a while back explaining where my issues lie. In a nutshell the info these places you're referring me to have inadequate information. I need more detail than what places like the alumni have. I graduated in 2009 so how can I use them?


How are you doing? Again, I am doing fantastic. This is more about how my neurology is configured and why I have a difficult time with things.

I remember in elementary school and middle school periodically I had to memorize a certain amount of vocabulary words in a week. This is what I did to pass the quizzes. First, I gave myself a review day. This meant all words had to be memorized by this day which was the day before the test. If I had to memorize the words by Friday then I made sure I memorized and looked over all of the words by Thursday. Let's say I had 10 words. I had 3 days to look over them and memorize them.

I calculated I had to memorize 3.3 words per day. There was no such thing as a third of a word to memorize. Therefore, I had to break this down further. In order to reach my goal, I decided to either round down to 3 or round up to 4. If I did 3 words per day I would've memorize 9 by the time Wednesday was out leading me with one word left to memorize. I would have to memorize 3 words from monday-wednesday, one word on Thursday and review as well on Thursday. I would memorize 10 after Wednesday was over If I rounded up to 4. I would have to memorize 4 words on Monday, 4 words on Tuesday, 2 words on Wednesday and review on Thursday.
I had two possible solutions. R means review

A. 3-3-3-1-R solution
B. 4-4-2-R solution

Both solutions were equally viable but if I wanted extra time on Wednesday to watch Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles I did the B solution. I had to incorporate this with other homework as well. This in a nutshell is how I think.

This is where I ran into problems in trying to obtain a job.
The first step in trying to solve a problem is to be able to identify the problem and the second is to analyze the problem. http://www.pitt.edu/~groups/probsolv.html
I defined the problem as obtaining an Information Technology job in programming. I realized I was missing data. This was the data I was missing:

A. name of my position
B. requirements to obtain said position
C. hierarchy of the job positions
D. how to determine how much one is worth
E. requirements for moving up in rank for each position
F. how to determine how much taxes to take off
G. where the leaf nodes are in this hierarchy meaning where is the bottom.

To solve a, I tried a few keywords like programmer, etc. I lacked a name and it took about 2 months for me to obtain a name. It was easy to see the requirements to obtain said positions but the issue I encountered was that each job required multiple skills and each skill required years of experience. Each skill I had did not transfer that well to other IT jobs.

I tried to look for the hierarchy of the job positions and requirements to move up in rank but alas nothing was stated on their websites. There was no hierarchy or any rubric whatsoever. I lacked what the leaf nodes or where the bottom was at. I still do. On the websites they sold their products and they talked about concepts and spoke in a conceptual way. There are no specifics I can tell whatsoever in the way they speak.

In order for one to determine how much he or she is worth in the marketplace he would have he would have to data on what a good chunk of the people make for that position and do a statistical analysis. He would have to obtain salaries and makes sure the data he obtains was reliable and valid. I would obtain what year they graduated college from and what college they graduated from. Once the statistical analysis is done he or she has to make sure there is a wide diversity spread. Once the data is accurate and good enough the data has to be arranged from lowest to highest in spreadsheet software package like excel. Since employers want a range when you quote them a salary I would bring the four lowest numbers on this analysis and quote a range involving these four numbers. This is because I was at the bottom.

In TSI (Technical Systems Integrators), I did not know what they meant by taking taxes off so I had them take off none. If I have to fill this out need more data to go on as to determining how much to take off and what it inherently means.

For one to be able to take initiative, unless it is blatantly obvious like picking up some trash I would need more data as to what my boundaries are. Am I required to be like Grace Hopper? What is the extent to this? What are my boundaries?

Employers require an employee to be on time for their shifts every time. How does an employee account for and determine all variables that could cause problems of him or her getting to the work environment on time? If there are so many possibilities that could happen how would he be able to account for all possibilities? I was able to come up with a solution for vocabulary words and definitions. How does one meet a standard that would require data such as this? If one can't obtain the data then why is the employee always expected to show up on time 100% of the time for their entire employment?

Everyone else is somehow able to obtain all of this and quickly. How do they do this? These are the inherent issues I have encountered. How does one set a career goal without the data? Metaphorically, If one does not understand the syntax and the logic behind a programming language then how can he debug programming code? If anyone asks me what are my goals for my career and for my life I can't answer the question because I have insufficient data to provide a meaningful answer like multivac and all of its successors stated in "The Last Question" by Isaac Asimov.

What is society and the employer's programming?

Sometimes alumni offices will help graduates, even if they have graduated awhile back. Sometimes they will connect you with other alumni who are in a position to hire (Networking in a very non-computer oriented sense.) If you have tried there and they are not helpful, then you'll have to use other methods, which you would want to use in addition to the college method anyway.

If you are contracting and responsible for your own withholding, the IRS.gov website will have the appropriate form and worksheet for calculating withholding based on your dependents etc. It will not include asking about every financial detail, so it will not be exact. It is safer to overpay and get a little money back at tax time, then underpay and incur interest and penalties.

You are not going to be able to get all the information you are seeking in the requirement gathering process. Employers will not give you all that information. There are websites where you can get average salary data, by region, and job, but it tends to be skewed because of the nature of their sampling method and exclude relevant variables. It will give you an idea, although not an accurate one. Just like we were talking about before, 100% certainty is not happening in the real world.

The key is going to be to look for searches on Monster or DICE or wherever, based on the best description of what you do, computer programmer, say, and see what listings they have. You may have to type in "entry-level" if your job searches only find jobs that require tons of experience for each skill. If you are in the ball park of a job's requirements but not an exact fit, you can still apply and explain in your cover letter what attributes you have that best fit the position. Sometimes, companies will put a laundry list of "want to have" kinds of skills and just see how close they can get. Sometimes they will want everything on the list. You will have no way of knowing. This is an example of where you have to act confident, even if you are not. If you not think you can do a job, the prospective employer will not either. Sometimes you will not have a good idea what the job involves until you are interviewed, You have to project confidence to get the interview even without that knowledge. That is how it works, unfortunately.

You will not be able to find out career trajectory, pay bands or any of that kind of information until being hired. Employers do not like to give that info. You -might- be able to get some of it from HR (if the company is big enough) AFTER you are hired. If you get multiple offers, you will just have to make a decision based on the parameters you are given. The most initial info you can expect to get are pay and benefits in addition to a vague job description. More specifics will be given at the interview stage, but no where close to what you want. Why? Because they can hire people without giving this information.

I understand what you are saying especially when you are state "This is an example of where you have to act confident, even if you are not. If you not think you can do a job, the prospective employer will not either. " I do accept that 100% is impossible. In addition, I'm not limiting the discussion of confidence to employers only. With respect to employers if I do not feel confident I could do the job why would I apply? By doing that, 1. I would feel with every fiber of my being that I am committing a form of fraud. 2. I would be wasting the employers time. He or she has other things to do besides meeting me for an interview for a job I do not feel confident that I could perform.

To portray myself as confident when I am not feels wrong. Every fiber of my being is screaming at me that I am committing a form of fraud, that this is deceptive and wrong. This is an internal struggle I am going through with myself. This just makes me want to rage and meltdown. I know what you're saying is true but what you're describing that I will have to do feels fake, horrible, phony, wrong, deceptive and dishonest. I have the feelings of anger at the thought of this right now.

I'm not angry at you though. You are telling me what the facts and truth are and I do appreciate that. This is a painful struggle for me and I am conflicted as to doing what is morally right and meeting societal standards. I am really trying to be very humble about this by noting about myself that I am not perfect either. I am trying to keep my ego out of the way on this and assume that maybe I am wrong on something.

I know what you are saying. I have had similar issues at times. I have tried to look at it this way. Games have rules. Life is full of games. Some of the rules are stated, some are unstated and implied, some seem to contradict. It is hard.

Applying for a job that you are have some doubt you are qualified for is not fraud. It is following the unstated rules of the game. You are not wasting anyone's time. Companies are pretty efficient at going through this stuff, especially Internet applications, and they expect a certain amount of non-fit applications. It is part of their calculations. Companies will also waste applicant's time as well. I have been on interviews where the interviewer interviewed me because my resume "looked interesting" and he "likes to meet new people." Yes, I was annoyed, but there are certain things you have to put up in life, and people wasting your time is one of those things.

I think the major misstep you are making is again one of black-and-white thinking. Nobody expects someone to be 100% confident when applying for a job - it is assumed by both parties that confidence is a variable.

Think of it this way: if you were truly faking confidence, you would be applying for jobs like astronaut or CEO that pay a lot of money but for which you are not qualified. You are qualified to do the work you are applying for and know you are, therefore you are not lying when you approach a job you're qualified to do with confidence.

Yes, you don't know every variable that might crop up. Yes, you might even have guessed wrong and you might wind up not qualified for the job (for this reason, you should be asking questions about what is expected of you in an interview, btw. You are interviewing them to make sure you are a good fit for the job just as much as they are doing the same to you.) That's not at issue.

The issue is, you know your qualifications and capabilities, and in the big picture you have an idea of where those will best serve you and your potential employer. You don't need to approach this issue as though only perfection is acceptable.

Another way to think about it: are you as good as the "next guy" who is applying for this job?

I know you don't know the "next guy," but think about it: someone who is better at this than you is probably applying for a better position.

You can therefore assume that, provided you've picked the job appropriately, you can be confident you are as good as or better than most of the other applicants. You certainly have a unique skill set to offer that sets you apart and is an asset (e.g. your analytical thinking.)

I do understand we don't have to be and we can't be 100% confident. The thing is though we're expected to project like we are though. I will give a concrete example of this. I know someone who critiqued someone because this guy did not act like and portray that he didn't manage and do his business on his own. I said "he doesn't do it on his own. This doesn't make any sense to me. Why would someone portray something which is not? This person has a sizable business. More than likely he has employees and volunteers. Does Bill gates do everything by himself?" I was told that Bill Gates makes it seem like he does it on his own.

This makes no logical sense to me whatsoever. If I know businessman z had help along the way, he knows he had help why would he portray himself as not having help and I have to pretend he did not have help? This is what I am being asked to do and it feels wrong. For me, it is like being asked to accept that a cup of coffee is not a cup of coffee.

I don't understand how a cup of coffee is not a cup of coffee. I can't find a logical basis for this. I have tried to find examples in which a particular entity is not a particular entity but alas I cannot. I tried to see if I could find a counter example to the law of identity but I cannot. It is like I am being asked to deny reality itself. I don't know how to wrap my mind around this.

I do have a question. Does gender have any correlation to severity of his or her autism? Both of you ASDMommyandKid and momsparky seems to be able to do this while I have major difficulty with this.

asdmommyandkid, I remember the paper about superheroes and how you made the comment about how your son would see it as an utter lie. I have the feeling I would see it the same way as well. I really am trying to be flexible on this and to look at it from different angles but I still can't seem to wrap my mind around this.

LOL - there are documented gender differences, but I think it is that girls are socialized to be more empathetic from the beginning - so we probably got better supports as kids than you might have.

Here's the thing: Bill Gates doesn't do it all himself, but he is RESPONSIBLE for everything that happens in his company. At some point, he has to make decisions that trickle down to all those people, and if any of those people mess up in a major way, he is the one on whom the axe will fall.

Therefore, he can project that he manages the business on his own, because he is accepting responsibility - good and bad - for all the people who work for him. For instance, he can do an awful lot to take ownership of his company simply by hiring good people and firing bad ones - if he hired people with innovative new ideas, in some part the CEO is responsible for those innovative new ideas, if only that he saw the potential that employee had when he brought them into the company.

Does that make sense? A business only cares about whether or not you will be an asset and not a liability. HOW you will be an asset and not a liability doesn't matter to them - whether you are an asset via your own work or via your ability to cost-effectively bring out work in other people isn't important.

The superheroes post was someone else's child. I think I just posted a response on there.

Anyway, I know what you are saying. Females present differently and maybe there is a greater push to conform and therefore we conform more to general societal rules. I always had trouble with the additional set of "girl rules," though, as those are very Byzantine to me. I don't do well in single-gendered groups of females, and I usually skitter away and associate with multi-gendered groups or the group of husbands, if my husband is there.

I have had similar issues in the past and additional girl issues like feeling like I was breaking rules if I was rude to guys being gross, even though they were breaking rules by being gross. I could have gotten into some really bad, trouble. So being female and autistic is not necessarily always easier.

As far as businessmen taking credit for everything, it is kind of like this: When you have a leadership role over something, it is generally expected that you will be taking responsibility for everything your underlings, and their underlings do. Yo generally also end up taking credit for exogenous factors that occur in your favor, even things you could not predict. On the other hand it often works the same way with blame. You end up being blamed for things that were not specifically as a result of your direct actions. All of this applies to businessmen, politicians; anyone who is in charge. My dad used to refer to this as being "captain of ones ship." Like how captains (supposedly) went down with the ship if it was sinking.

I do not know if this is human nature or cultural, but this is how responsibility/credit/blame works.

Yes, what you said makes sense to me. All of what you said is true. This may seem strange to you but you, asdmommyandasdkid and inthistogether seem to know how to read my mind and understands the questions I am asking. You all understand the objections I have had and in some cases still do have. You all understand the underlying reasoning. You three know how to put it in a way that is logically coherent for me.

Without you to explain the thing about Bill Gates I would not have saw it that way.

With the empathy thing, I did go to a rage management counselor. It helped quite a bit with my extreme raging. I would rage heavily so much that my family thought I would stroke out or have a heart attack. I do not understand the empathy thing though. I do care about others welfare and I don't want others to get hurt. I do feel bad when I do something to offend or inadvertently hurt someone. A psychopath wouldn't I don't think. I do not understand.

See this post: http://www.wrongplanet.net/postp3035045.html