Does "Mild" Aspergers exist?

Post Reply New Topic

Fnord is a socialist!! !!





Thanks for the laugh.

Gear down, eager partisans! I am not a card carrying member of team anti-self-diagnosis. I merely state that if you want some degree of certainty about what is behind your ASD-like traits, you are probably not going to be satisfied until you see a professional. Any tentative conclusions that you draw on the basis of your own research will never carry the authority of the view of a licensed professional.

I am totally cool with it if you are OK with your own self diagnosis or find it impossible for whatever reason (and I know only too well how financial issues can be a barrier) to get a professional assessment.

One of the issues involved in being assessed rather than self diagnosing is the inability to observe one's own behavior from an external perspective.

I learned that I am not as good at passing as I thought. I learned that I was nowhere near as good at reading social communication as I thought and that was shocking to me. The doctor who assessed me pointed out many things that I was totally unaware of. Some of them were so unfamiliar to my thinking that I had to ask my wife about them later and she confirmed his view. I have to admit--some parts of that experience had me in tears. I prefered thinking I was more skilled and learning the truth hurt. But the point is that self awareness and self observation can be hard.

I think that people who have come to the awareness that they have autistic traits are doing well if they learn about how autistic people live with similar traits, so I don't think there is a ton of harm in self diagnosis even if it's sometimes mistaken.

I suspect that the issues that lead non-autistic people who mistakenly believe they are autistic or lead some others to claim to be autistic when they know they are not will eventually be evident enough that they will seek clarification or find they can't maintain the persona.

Also, there are many internal signs and symptoms of ASD that a doctor or licensed whatever will never read in any college course textbook. Assuming they have such textbooks. I've never researched or looked into what the academics are using these days to learn about conditions, spectral "disorders", and such.

From the last few doctors i've had seems they know woefully little about actual ASD. As it is in the real world. I think many of them just go by what they see in movies amd maybe some documentaries (and i've seen many misrepresenting docs about autism).

And I forgot to mention this but, yes, of course it is good to get an evaluation by a good doctor ( validation of the system complete, proceed with the rest of the paragraph, lol) and get some external feedback, which of course you cannot do for yourself. however, doctors are not the only people on this entire planet which can give you extra know feedback. it seems kind of silly that I even have to mention this fact. just like I don't have to mention the fact that the sky is blue, well, most of the time

Adamantium, (ur lucky to have snagged that name)

No, I didn't call fnord a "socialist".
Simply, I called his maxim a socialist one.
And it is an absolutist one, especially the way "only" is used.
in the real world, absolute statements are almost never true.

You should be more careful not to put your own words in other people's mouths.

Take care

Socialist, statist, potato, po-tah-toe

Ya well , can't please everyone.
I know "socialism" is a fight-or-flight triggering word,
but if there were a better , less controversial word, I'd use it.
Funny how when you use it, ppl automatically internalize it, and assume you're labeling them with it.

Maybe "collectivist" ?

I'm just sick of walking on egg-shells around everyone, (all my life basically, not knowing I was autistic, and I tended to try to ppl-please everyone)
since it seems everybody nowadays thinks nobody should say anything they disagree with, and they think it gives them permission to go to extremes and take offense, as if they were the king or queen of some undiscovered kingdom, I have
yet to hear about. Not saying you're like that, but in the current politically-correct (very bad for peaceful social relatioms and free-thinking culture) climate and culture we have, generally, ppl are tending more towards that. Unfortunately.

One of the things I love about English is the abundance of words with varied connotations and degrees of precision of meaning.

We have horses, for example, but we also have stallions, mares, colts, foals, fillies, geldings, mustangs, broncos and so on.

When I learned the meaning of the word socialist, the word defined an economic system and could not be accurately used in other ways. But it evidently means something else to you.

That's OK. That's the way language is. It's always a comprise between individual intention and shared or disparate experience. And it changes over time. That's OK, too.

In my understanding, the difference between statist and socialist is large. Just as many mammals are living things, but not all living things are mammals, many socialists are statists, but many statists are not at all socialist.
I learned that there were useful distinctions between these terms, hence my reaction. It was not a potayto-potahto case to me. But it's fine that it means that to you-it just means we speak different dialects of English.

...yes

Adamantium,

just out of curiosity, how do you think you can be a socialist without being a statist first ? that is to say, how are you going to implement socialism onto the populace without a central state (govt) ?

unless you are talking about anarchic socialism.
in which case that is an entirely different conversation. not to mention that an archaic socialism has never been accomplished in the real world, by human beings. human beings don't even know how to do anarchy. without devolving into a never ending state of conflict and violence. which is of course just groups of
humans vying to dominate an entire country.
which of course, leads you back to statehood.

stefan Molyneux talks about this in depth online, YouTube. she has many videos talking about the difference between socialism, anarchic socialism, fascism, pure anarchy, and the rest. our species only knows how to do socialism and fascism ( and communism, of course) , and so far it is only been of the aggressive, violent flavor. and since we are only apes, and we still have a very long way to evolve, it seems we will not be able to achieve any type of peaceful anarchy anytime soon.

But you can be a Statist without being a Socialist. The Nazis were Statists--they certainly weren't Socialists.

if you see anomalies in my prose it's this very quirky voice to text program that changes words on me, and often makes single words into plural words and vice versa.

and by the way, peaceful anarchy would be my preferred world to live in.

Since females tend to get diagnosed later in life if at all, you could say it's because we usually have "mild" Aspergers, but I don't really believe that at all. We just have different ways of coping with it.

Anyway isn't Asperger's supposed to be a "mild" case of Autism?

Hi kraftiekortie,

Yes, that is a very common argument.
however stefan Molyneux will disagree with you. so will Scott M, he's a Scottish political analyst on YouTube, and he is very good. I recommend you check him out.

the original name of the party that Hitler and his colleagues created was actually "The National Socialist Party". and they changed the name later when they came to power.

of course you are right, statism and socialism are not exactly the same thing.
however they are not that different, and they are definitely not polar opposites.
I guess it depends on what your precise definition of statism is.

I would prefer anarchy, but I think realistically all governments and countries around the world should strive to achieve Minarchism. which is of course minimal government, and minimal influence of government in people's private lives.
can you be a statist and a minarchist at the same time? I think that is an excellent question, (pats self on the back), and honestly I don't know what the answer is.

anyways, I think we are getting way off topic.
thanks for the question.

One more "derailment": NAZI itself is the German acronym for "National Socialism." But they were virulent anti-socialists

Yes, there is much "mild Aspergers" out there in the computer trenches.

It is a spectrum disorder with varying levels of impairment. I don't like labelling things like this, just because one is considered higher functioning relative to classical severe end of the Autism spectrum doesn't mean they are not severely impaired in their day to day activities relative to the rest of the population.