The site where they BASH Aspie husband and wives. :O

Post Reply New Topic

I apologize in advance if something I type appears misleading or inaccurate. I retain a large amount of ideas in my mind (from previous posts) that are not readily expressed through one quick post. I do not care for an argument as a result, as I do not express myself appropriately. I will reply if necessary to explain myself, but will not engage in debate unless a thread is made specific to the discussion.

I do not ever intend to pick apart a post, rather I attempt to reflect on the general idea evoked by the comment I quote. I will briefly allude to what I mean by this with a comment directly below the first quote.

If personal experience was the strongest factor in theorizing, then everybody has the potential to be correct, regardless of what is reality. My experience and understanding is completely different to yours. It is difficult to understand why you pass your perspective as reality (your observations and experiences), but any NTs as a reflection, or indication of their identity. I also fail to accept that an NT's world revolves around serving their identity in a way polarizing to the autistic life experience.



Groups are selected via a foundation of bias, negating any validity of such a claim. There are vastly more NTs than there are autistic individuals, but you're assuming that you will select the rare individual that partakes in the abuse of animals. Even given that the individual was in the group, the likelihood that such behaviour would be copied is very low. Most NTs do not thirst for the suffering of animals. It is also far more likely that the person abusing the animal would be ostracized, disgraced or (if in an uncontrolled scenario) punished by law.

Assuming that the AS group will consist of autistic children with severe problem behaviours (such as repetitively biting animals or parents) is identical in nature.



If you have time to create one, it would be interesting to read a thread detailing the reverse-engineering that you have done.



From my perspective you aren't bashing or insulting, but you are generalizing in a way that is unnecessary - with malice, which is indifferent to the website in question. I don't claim to understand (or have outside knowledge of) your theories, but your posts typically create an uncomfortable atmosphere (in the fashion of the other website) for anybody that does not have AS, as you appear to jump at any opportunity to discuss your perceived shortcomings of NTs.

I'm accepting of the fact that my posts do not always radiate positivity, though I find it distasteful for such hatred to exist within a support forum. It reminds me of a quote 'be the bigger man', where one person has failed to uphold honour (as an analogy, the website in question), and the other (WP) should avoid harmful discussion. Put simply, I understand a need to vent or express ideas that may not be politically correct, though it is often clear when there are negative underlying intentions (which, ideally, one should be able to see past).



The definition of NT that you use is completely ignorant of variation within the group, hence you're essentially comparing one specific type of apple (autistic individuals) to every other apple in existence (NTs). I relate it to referring to 'science' as only being chemistry, as that is all that you are aware of. You ignore physics, biology, and all other sciences. Compounding this problem, you choose a particular branch of chemistry that you do not like (your experience). It isn't an accurate representation.

In social terms, I am an NT because I am not autistic. I have clinical OCD, a tic disorder, am homosexual, and have a slew of other neurological problems/differences. My life experience (as an NT) is entirely different to how you describe it to be. My opinion of the NTs and autistics around me also vastly differs from yours, and I don't appreciate being indirectly referred to as insane because of that.

When you claim that NTs are obsessed with servitude of their identity, or that a hivemind completely dominates our thinking, I can't understand why, as to me, it appears to be as baseless as the claims that those with AS do not possess empathy, or that they are more prone to being serial killers. It doesn't seem real, but you continuously mention that your theories have basis in reality, and others are entirely conceptual, without a means to explain why that is actually the case.



Generalities are often useful, however when a factual basis is absent, discussing them (with what is obviously some form of spite or hatred) openly will cause conflict.

It reminds me of the fact that money is in reality, imaginary. You once posted that to aliens, money it is paper, that is what is real. However, it holds importance, and it must hold importance here on Earth. Without the concept of money, a market would not work, and we would not have our advanced civilization. Everybody is aware that money is imaginary, though it is not insane to treat it otherwise. If I won $10,000, I would be happy to receive piles of paper (money), as I know exactly what it is used for. I could buy a new computer, and that would bring me happiness, which along with the avoidance of pain, remains the sole goal of life. I don't see why you are so against the nature of concept, as it makes so much more possible. It does not disconnect you from reality.

You can't seriously tell me that if you won a billion dollars, you would not feel elation. Perhaps you would struggle to identify the feeling (due to alexithymia), but I am sure that you would not throw that paper in the trash - which is another way of viewing reality.

You people need to get off olympiadis' case. He has attempted to find the fundamental factors that drive NT behavior. This is in stark contrast to the posts on the other site where it is simple minded vilification and bashing of aspies. Of course, not all NTs engage in these behaviors and I don't see anywhere where olympiadis has said so. He has only generalized to the extent required to make logical deductions about the behavior of NTs. And his personal experience is not just his personal experience but it also matches to a great extent to my own personal experience. As such, I find his posts quite useful.

Seconded.

He just sounds like he has a serious chip on his shoulder.

Simon Baron-Cohen once found (through studies) that autistics had 'no empathy', a statement that virtually every autistic individual disagrees with (I happen to as well). If somebody were to make an elaborate post as to why it were true (and they were NT), and did so in a manner that displayed enthusiasm consistently, it should not be unacceptable for somebody to feel uncomfortable.

I am interested in the logical deductions, but when they are constantly empowered with negative emotion (such as it would be with my above example), a biased agenda almost certainly exists. The other website is quite extreme, but built on the same premises. A war is still a war, regardless if ten people are killed, or a whole nation is taken over.

I am on the spectrum and I don't disagree with that statement at all.
Autistics do indeed have 'no empathy' when that empathy is cognitive empathy. And how does one arrive at that finding? It is only through deeper study and logical deduction and testing theories, not by superficial observation and vilification.



That would not upset me at all. What would upset me is if someone was bashing simply for the sake of bashing without attempting to provide a logical explanation. That is why I have an issue with the other site.



It seems to me that you actually are not interested in logical deductions. Why else would you bring emotions and feelings into this? These things are meaningless when it comes to the quest for truth. If you think that Olympiadis' logic is faulty and his theories are kooky, and you can provide a more plausible theory for observed NT behavior, then by all means poke holes in his theories and destroy them logically. I am all for it. But for heaven's sake, do not stifle the quest for truth just because it makes you uncomfortable.

I disagree with the notion that people with autism have no empathy or even lack cognitive empathy. I believe the issue revolves more around the ability of people with autism to react appropriately in a fluid or timely manner when it comes to the thoughts and feelings of others. However this is just my opinion although I did read about some ongoing research related to this.

Also I don't agree with Olympiadis' assertion or generalization that NT's are psychopaths.

Last edited by blueblahbleh on 20 Oct 2014, 6:58 am, edited 2 times in total.

To each their own. Your only gripe with my post was that you viewed what I quoted to be in 'stark contrast' of the other website, while I did not. It appears this is just our conflicting perspective, so there is no arguing in it.



Logical deductions and emotions are not mutually exclusive. I'm not a robot. I am allowed to have both feelings, and be interested in logical conclusions. You can present a logical conclusion in an ordinary way, or you could be rough about it.



It isn't a quest for truth. It is somewhat a domineering point of view (subjective descriptions such as insane, psychopathic etc.) spread across many posts.

I don't understand what was so logically incorrect with my previous posts, nor do I see it as stifling the 'quest for truth'. You found something you didn't like about my post and emphasized what you perceive to be a personal shortcoming of myself (which was vaguely relating it to the other website, with ONE line) rather than read the rest of it.

I have read here time and again that autistics do not appreciate having their life experience explained for them by NTs (especially in derogative manner). Considering my circumstances, is it really that drastic to wish for the same treatment?

I won't comment here again, so if you wish to respond, PM is the only option.

When I posted in this thread, I did not intend to embark on a long conversation, so there will be no PMs. I will note a couple of points however for the readers of this thread.

Firstly, the quest for truth is mine and that of the other ASDer readers of this thread who are the primary audience of this site.
Could olympiadis be more diplomatic in his posts? Perhaps. Could he be more politically correct ? Maybe. But I recognize that he is on the spectrum and thus the message he conveys is far more important than the manner he conveys it. There is also the very real danger that trying to be diplomatic could render his posts useless from a practical standpoint.

PS: If somebody can point me to posts where NTs explain the life experience of autistics, no matter how derogatory, I would greatly appreciate it.

I disagree. The demarcation between the servitude of identity being primary in one's thinking or a secondary simulation is very polarizing as it precipitates massive differences in thought and behavior.
That everybody has the potential to be correct is irrelevant. Experiences must be fit into a model that can then be tested for logical integrity.
The perspectives that I type are after I have done my best to extract them from a logical working model.
A simple collection of personal experiences would be much less meaningful and would likely appear on the surface to have far too many logical inconsistencies. Data conditioning must be done, and part of that is looking for and trying to account for personal bias that is most often emotionally based.

You are correct for calling things into question when you are not able to fit claims into a logical model though. I will try to help with that.
However, I must point out that the avoidance of using accurate descriptions will cause logical failures. A prime example is: if because of an emotional bias, one is simply unable to admit that either they, or other people, are engaging in psychopathic behaviors, then any thought that could be used to remedy the situation will be impeded. I suggest you stop looking at such claims as "insult" or "hatred". Stop assigning your own arbitrary meaning to such terms or claims. A positive or negative label is NOT a certainty, but a dynamic thing that changes with environment. To mentally make such things certain, is a path to disaster. If you are unable to accurately describe a problem, then arriving at any real solution is unlikely.
You may "hear" me saying that NTs are the problem, but what I'm saying is that the incompatibility is the problem.
Further, true psychopaths are born the way they are just as we are born with our skin color. Emotionally assigned negative connotations are improper and do not help advance rational thought. I'm not sure why you "hear" malice or hatred in my posts, other than they often offer an alternative perspective to what is mainstream. There are times when my personal feeling does come out and I state it as such, like "I do not like how people treat each other, how they treat animals", etc... That is not part of a logical model, though I may use a logical model within the same post.




I think you must have misunderstood the theoretical situation that I was trying to describe, though I don't know how to describe it better.
A big part of the point is that NTs generally strive to do what society/hierarchy/authority expects of them. This has been proven by the Eichmann/Milgram experiments. Though no environment really exists where aspies have grown up without exposure to these social forces, highly functional adult aspies are still very non-compliant to the wishes of the social pressures, and I speculate would produce drastically different results in the Eichmann/Milgram experiments.
Beyond the speculation that the results would be vastly different, I make great effort to explain the mental processes that would make this so.
Two main principles involved in the NT process are "certainty' and "the ends justifies the means".
Both of these principles are explained by Jacob Bronowski in "The Ascent of Man" series, and I happen to agree with him strongly as all of the assertions are based on solid logical models. Models must be used because ideas are not tangible items.

As for that last part, I will use an example to disprove your speculation about the acceptance of psychopathic behavior (abuse).
There are nine cats on my street that live outside now because their owners abandoned them when they moved away. Some moved due to hard times and lack of resources, but I know of two who moved to go into a larger more expensive home, so there wasn't even the excuse of resource loss there. I have yet to observe any of them being punished/ostracized for their behaviors. The animals are abandoned and the suffering is real. The perpetrators acted so directly due to social expectations. The "thirst for the suffering" is a strawman. The suffering is simply the fallout from the process of "the ends justifies the means", and the "ends" is satisfying the expectations of upward mobility within society. These people could have made sacrifices in order to uphold their initial commitment to their pets, but they chose the personal "rewards" that come from the path of the least sacrifices.



I had tried to do that, and a lot of the relevant information and descriptions are here in this thread:
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postxf265509-0-30.html

Some people got caught up in their emotional response to the wording and were unable to focus on the logical model.
Abilities vary with individuals.




Again you are assigning your arbitrary meaning/intent to my words. I think you should realize that any uncomfortable atmosphere is something one creates internally in a situation like this. You can't say that a poster is to be held responsible for everyone's own personal comfort level. I do not believe I have added wording to my posts that would allow someone to rationally conclude malice or hatred, and certainly not in this thread.
By the way, the social expectation of individuals to NOT be allowed to express things like their own honest hatreds is yet another function of the hive-mind that functions as behavior control, requires added levels of deception, and ensures perpetual conflict & resolution cycles.

One result is that you're not completely sure what anyone really hates, and so must be suspicious of everyone. However, as I stated earlier, emotional preference has no place in logical models.



That is the hive-mind directly talking to you with the expectation of behavior control. Your reward is that you perceive your peers to think of you as a bigger man, though suppressing your own real emotions is a simulation of psychopathic behavior, as well as being deceptive. A bigger man is thought to be a higher place in hierarchy, but it is all imaginary. You are still the same person, but are now living with another suppressed emotion in order to please the hive.



Everything has variation, and I would not assume that I am ignorant of that because I've limited my descriptions to those applicable to my logical model.
For example, variations in sense of humor would be irrelevant to the processes I have described here. If you're determining key root differences between neurotypes, then a preconceived goal of "everyone is different" is not helpful. Variation does not negate clear patterns. All snowflakes have a hexagonally based structure, and it is for very specific reasons of how the energy is forced to flow in the proximity of the water molecules.
My own perception might be that they are all different, or that they are pretty, but that is irrelevant to the logical model.



I wouldn't have made the logical leap that you are typical because you're not autistic. If you were actually functionally typical, then the likelihood of you being on WP is relatively small. However, from your posts I would speculate that you are typical enough that may have near as much difficulty relating to the autistic experience as you do relating to the NT experience. Or perhaps you are mostly NT, but are often rejected by the hive, and feel that this environment is more accepting of differences ( and I think it is ).

The "insanity" I describe is the condition of being very much functionally disconnected from reality, and also being driven by external psychological forces.
Our brains spend more time sorting out imagination than they do processing real nerve inputs. The NT modality simply requires far more of this type of processing, to the point that it dominates (becomes primary) their method of thinking. To the person engaged in this type of thinking, they are unaware of the extent of influence of the imaginations of others, and perceive themselves to be operating independently, - as in they think they are expressing their individuality by exercising free will. One does not have to struggle to find examples of this. One has to struggle to find examples where this isn't the case.




If you are a part of it, then it will be extremely difficult to see, as if you're one of the middle fish within a school. To each fish they would perceive themselves as realizing intuitive information at an individual level, independent of any other fish. To them they are just doing what feels right to them. Individually they are unaware of the larger system intelligence that they are all connected to. Each would see themselves as perfectly normal like the other fish around them. They might deduce that the other fish are all acting similarly because it's just the right thing to do. To an outside observer this intuitive information would appear to be dominating their thinking. In the brains of each of the fish is a set of software that is very similar to the software in the fish around them. It seems to be copied or downloaded from the other fish, but actually comes from a common source, - the intuitive information that the fish get subconsciously. We call it instinct.

Humans (NTs) are also dominated by intuitive information that they perceive through their imagined identities. Basically all information is filtered through this identity software, primarily at a subconscious level. For example, the question of "how does this work?" becomes "what does this mean to me?"
Subjective labels must be assigned to everything, usually in dichotomies so that they can quickly be sorted into hierarchies.
If I describe a process, then you assign the meaning of "hatred" due to what your identity tells you intuitively (that I must hate something), you can sort it into the "bad" bin, and then know how your identity should respond to me. If all of this was instead done with conscious thought, then you would be unable to rationally conclude that I hated anything from the information that I communicated. To identity software there is no neutral information. It is all either positive or negative. NTs have processed virtually everything in this manner. The software that drives society is reflected in the imagined identities. This is a system intelligence (one-to-many) topology. Things like imagined hurt feelings, offense, or embarrassment happen within the identity software. They could not exist without being in an environment of other identities which share similar software and apply similar expectations/pressures.
If you found yourself naked in front of animals or aliens, then there would be no need for either to experience offense or embarrassment. Those emotions are not real because they are completely based on imagination. If they were real then they would happen in the absence of other imaginations. As it is they are a function of a system intelligence. System intelligence and individual intelligence are two very different things.

At this point I'm going to hope that it is becoming clear that imagined feelings can seem extremely real to an individual, and result in real physiological responses and consequences, even though their generation in the imagination was due to the pressures exerted by the imaginations of other people, with the particulars of the algorithms involved worked out long ago in our past. Surely you have observed that most animals do not experience anything like this, though several of the primates do. It's a function of a part of the brain that allows complex imagination. The feelings I'm talking about here are fabrications that are based upon other fabrications, and not on anything real. They provide the pressure or driving force for behaviors and have access to the chemical reward pathways in the brain.




No, not on Earth, but only in the presence of other human imaginations that have decided to treat this fabrication as real.
Importance is assigned by the identity, which is used to processing entirely imaginary data.
If you remove all of the other people who share this commonality within their identities, then your money becomes worthless.
It would then become clear to you that it was imaginary from the start.




The market is imaginary. Many cultures had advanced civilizations in the past without our market.

By the way my father and family were in Greece and Romania when the Russians came in, and overnight they lost all property and all of their money became worthless. At that point they realized just how insane it actually is to believe that paper money is real.




What you say here shows clearly your attachment to your identity, and what it is that you choose to serve. Money gives you imaginary power over other people. If they believe what you believe, then they will allow you to control them with your money. Money as a concept is responsible for most suffering. The concept exists and is wildly popular, though I don't agree with it in principle, because of how the concept is applied. Further, the nature of how this concept is applied makes our market unsustainable and necessarily forces people into default. There is a great many times more imaginary debt than there is imaginary money. The failure of the masses to recognize that it is imaginary is how we got into this situation. They are too busy worrying about their identities and where they are in hierarchy. The happiness you speak of is also not real. If the rest of society believed that you should be happy by acquiring a certain kind of stump, then that's what you would believe, and you would then convince yourself that you felt happy to the point that it had real effects. You might gain the favor of influential people by displaying your stump.




I would be very concerned about the real effects that the exchange of the money would produce. I certainly would not want anyone else to know. In this environment I may be able to reduce overall suffering if I were extremely careful, though there is no guarantee of that.




I would read it with interest, and if the supporting facts held up I would give it serious consideration. My own understanding of my experiences would have to be adjusted, but that's not something new. It naturally feels uncomfortable when an observation suggests a need to adjust your perception of reality. The fact of the poster being NT or AS should not be relevant.



Again I would suggest that you try to remove the negative emotion. I do not conclude negative emotion from your above example. Like a lot of AS folks, I don't read words that aren't there.
There at the end it seems that you admit to only having the suspicion of the biased agenda.

My agenda is to collect and share useful information.
I do not have some socially pressured "guilt" that makes me want to talk up the benefits of being NT in order to placate any particular group of people or their opinions.

I also realize that you or others may believe that I fabricated my models of the hive mind and identities in order to create a boogie-man that I can blame all of my problems on. That is part of the risk of sharing such information in an environment where some may not appreciate the implications. Overall, I think questioning intent or agenda is a good thing.

That said, every logical model can have flaws, and is only useful within a certain window of tolerance. That is the difference between knowledge and certainty.

I thought this thread provided an opportunity to point out some of the driving mechanisms behind the incompatibilities of AS/NT couples. There are clearly forces that pull each of the partners away from each other so that they become more separated over time. I try to describe some of the mechanisms that I think I understand. It seems to me that the AS partner most often remains loyal at the individual level, while the NT partner is most often re-assimilated. In simplified form it seems that the AS partners failed to serve the identities of the NT partner. To the AS partner it would simply make no sense to do so. The AS partner may have assumed that the NT joined in the relationship because they intended to form a bond of loyalty to the individual AS partner, and/or to the relationship itself. To me it seems that the NT actually joined into the relationship with the primary concern being "what can this relationship do for me?", or "how will this relationship integrate into my current and future social structures?".
This is identity based thinking. It is self-serving and psychopathy provides the most efficient means to serve the identity.

If the love was a real emotion, then it takes a conceptual back-seat to other concerns, - concerns which I claim to be identity based and imaginary in nature. Even when the concerns are in fact real, they displace the love to a lower position of priority when the relationship is considered. This is kind of like sending your parents to a "home" when they become too "inconvenient".

==> "Well pops I still love you but I just can't have any social life with you hanging around"
==> "Yes of course we love our cats, but we can't be having our new furniture damaged"

This is psychopathy. Take a big whiff. It's not going anywhere.

I hope I cleared up some concerns this time.

Those descriptions were meant as generally standard definition with no needed subjective twist.
That other people use those words for insult is not my concern.

Olympiadis,

I just want to say i totally agree with you, you can read about that in my email in a short while that i am typing as of right now

If someone was born lacking the ability of empathy, then what could we expect them to do about it?
Why should we think it vilification?

How about all of those people out there who have empathy and misuse it for purposes of deception and/or manipulation?

The answers are all subject to the current whims of society.

I'm more interested in facts concerning the differences, and how it all works than in what people may think about it. I find psychology fascinating.
There are a great many problems in our society, and I think most of them are psychologically based.

Also, it seems most people with AS experience a lot of confusion and alienation.
If my explanations or speculations are helpful to some of them, then I think the information worth sharing. I don't think that I'm alone in wishing that I had had more understanding of the people around me when I was a child.

Very well said. I agree. Just wanted to highlight this for those who might not read your entire post.

Having read your last few posts,

Yes, I have experienced this first hand in pretty much ALL of my relationships.
People with AS generally have this idea of loyalty when being in a relationship, while NT only go for personal happiness. You may truly love your partner, while your partner only see you as a 'C+" and openly looks for better options, or when she gets in a situation to do so.

There are MANY situations where logic totally flees your partner, note : that is obviously pretty much a NT woman trait. If a NT woman ever gets angry, be sure it has been building up for a very long time and you will never ever do anything right again.. like a self sustaining nuclear reaction.

Some reasons to set things in fire :
-Not having a job and income for a longer period of time
-Fails to clean up the house & cook
-Terrible bed performance and no longer gets things exciting (whatsup with the complicated mating rituals anyway? )
-Talking in a very specific (scientific) way that makes her feel she really is nothing special (i tend to do that but i am always polite..)
"He cant make me happy anymore so i run off"


In my last relationship, my girlfriend wanted to meet the love of her life from 10 years ago to see how things would be again, even when i strongly opposed it. Guess how that turned out? Selfish bastards they all are. I guess that is their definition of a relationship.

It's not just for those who do not have AS. I'm aspie and I don't like the atmosphere it creates either. (Nor do I agree with the claims). I know for a fact that things that are said on here can lead people to leave. I have known both aspies and NTs who have left as a result.

I want WP to be a welcoming place to everyone who accepts us, and everyone who wants to learn about how we are.


As for empathy, since that came up, I feel it less than the norm, but I have been known to have both emotional and cognitive empathy.