The neurodiverse perspective of theory of mind

Post Reply New Topic

As for the essay linked. I skipped to the conclusions and read this

Sorry but when anyone is trying to suggest "feminist" theory is a better tool for understanding the world than empiricism and science I have to laugh. This to me seems like pure SJW BS. Feminism and other "social science" disciplines have absolutely no relevance to real science. I have no need for feminist theory when trying to understand autism. Its irrelevant and anyone who thinks otherwise is simply an idealog. The essay seems to be entrenched in feminist theory and identity politics and as such is ideologically biased. I can't, therefore, take it seriously.

This is an unhelpful oversimplification, I think. A deeper look at this can be found here:
http://fas-philosophy.rutgers.edu/goldm ... k_.pdf.pdf
This excerpt is significant, I think:


The model they are discussing is the one Baron-Cohen began his work with and about which much has been written.

You should have read the entirety of the other piece. The feminist theory important to the author does not invalidate her ideas or the experience she is reporting. To sacrificing the value of the content of that piece in order to stay focused on a personal crusade against SJWs and feminist theorist is sad. Such an approach is mentally impoverishing, I would think.

You are correct. I will read the whole essay, although I must admit to some sense of trepidation in doing so, and will try and objectively report back.

The respondents' commentary (link at the end of page one) is a comprehensive response to the issues SBC wants to ignore and thank you so much SABR for that link. The point about empathetic response to music was particularly interesting.

In his commentary SBC implies the hoary old claim that "I am a scientist, therefore I am automatically right" and that is laughable; very very few academics have the effrontery to claim such certitude, and the rare ones who do are usually careerist bigots, who promote their viewpoint with gospel fervour dismissing anything to the contrary, like a religious bigot.

I think most, if not all scientists, are that arrogant, they just don't publicly express it because it isn't P.C. or polite or whatever.

I never try to guess what other people are thinking. Once, though, I met a girl on the internet that I identified immediately, and whom we started communicating very frequently. Then, after some days, we were talking when I felt something astonishing! While talking to her by internet, typing, I felt that not only I coul guess her thoughts and feelings, but that she could do the same, guessing my thoughts!

It was the first time I felt so. I felt very shy after noticing she could guess my thoughts, while the same happened to her, even stronger than to me.

I think NTs are very similar to each other, and expect reading the other person's mind like this. I suppose they expect to read my mind the same way they do to everyone, believing all people are similar. I think they punissh us if we are not.

I don't think most, nor the majority of academics are that arrogant. Over several decades, I recall personally meeting (in academic settings) only four that would openly declare and assert that particular "I am a scientist" surpremacy to dismiss all other dissenting views - even to other academics often far better qualified than they were.

Two were psychiatrists, one was a hardline Skinnerian behaviourist, and one was a cognitive psychologist. Their 100% certainty that they were only and always right was not, in my not so humble opinion, scientific, but spoke more of their commitment to a belief system.

Taking on someone else's perspective to any significant degree means you must copy and run some of their mind viruses in your own brain, and I usually either don't want to do that, or it gets filtered out as outside contamination.

Fundamentalist-Materialism Over-Powered. Typically more common amongst Psychiatrists/Psychologists than that of other Academic/Professional-Disciplines. All Materialists are Atheists (but not all Atheists are Materialists).

I agree that it's important to avoid empathising with the hive-mind when it's being hostile or attempting to dominate, but my experience with perspective-taking is that it can give me an advantage over opponents:

"perspective-taking buyers achieve better deals than empathizing buyers"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perspecti ... ive-Taking

To me, it's much the same as the adage "know your enemy."

I wanted to know more specifically:

1. When you read a story, do you have difficulty or abilities in being in the shoes of the character? (as a kid and adult?)
I am not really sure about this question as I am a writer and an English major and spend quite alot of time with characters. I would say it depends on the character. If it is Alice from Alice in Wonderland or Priscilla from "The Blithesdale Romance", then, yes, I can very much imagine myself being this person in this book-- they have to have similar beliefs and ways of seeing the world and the moment that they do something or say something I do not agree with, this illusion is broken or else I will begin thinking that I am secretly like them and that I did not know it. This happens alot with Priscilla as according to my Transcendentalism professor, Priscilla may not have been this innocent sprightly nineteen year old woman caught between the immaterial and the material, so clumsy and ghostly and so ready to play in the grasses and so easily preyed upon, describing herself as a "leaf. I have no free will"; she may have actually been puppeteering the whole thing-- manipulating the world around her so that she could have a comfortable life, having her sister commit suicide along the way-- as part of her dissembling veiled as she is often believed to be Veiled Lady-- although, I argued in one of my papers on literary paradoxes that despite the 150 years of critics believing that Priscilla is the Veiled Lady, the text never overtly identifies her as such... Anyway, I am constantly terrified that I am just like my professor's theory of Priscilla, that I am this sweet, confused child-woman on the outside, but this manipulative Veiled Lady on the inside and this is a frequent fear of mine even after almost a year since we read this book in class... So I would say yes, I over identify with specific characters in books. I do not just walk in their shoes. I grow their feet and suddenly, them and I become unrecognizable from each other...

2. When you read a story that shifts from one scene to another scene, is it difficult for you to keep track? Why do you think so? (as a kid and adult)

Well, I have a little trouble with stories that are told in the perspective of multiple characters, but not really across multiple time periods or things that shift too much. I have a little trouble, but not as much as shifting from one physical room to another physical. I am reading and in my mind and my mind has many rooms and it is much less overwhelming to wander about inside. I wander and I like stories that wander too. I prefer stream of consciousness writing...

3. As a child, was it difficult for you to understand when to use "I" and when to use "you" when talking?
I still have trouble doing this! I will often move from "I" to "you" when self referencing (even referring to past selves in third person) when speaking or writing... I like it though as I do enjoy writing in second person... Knock on wood that it stays...

4. As a child or adult, did you or do you have trouble figuring out when people are talking about something that is happening NOW, happened in the past or will happen in the future?

I am not sure... I do struggle with tenses when writing or speaking sometimes, but I am not sure if I ever got confused about the time placement of an event when someone else was speaking... I cannot think of any specific examples...

Knock on wood that nothing in me changes for revealing things...

I worked as a book reviewer for a national newpaper reviewing mainly fiction for 3 years, and have worked as a publisher's reader and publishing editor in my later years. No TOM issues at all ever affected my work, and no-one I worked for had any problem with the quality of my work. So the suggestion that TOM is an essential feature of all people with AS and therefore I must have no or an impaired TOM is very offensive to me; to some extent probably most people to one degree or another struggle with discerning underlying meaning in social transactions from time to time.

My earlier academic specialities included and focused particularly on studying philosophy of science and how its insights applied to what is called "experimental psychology" in academia, as well as psychophysics.

This quote from the cited article (in SpaceAgeBookRanger's post) sums up precisely and succinctly what I think about the poorly founded and overstated claims about TOM:

I do not think I am wrong in implicating ToM in a "chicken-egg" reductionism (Ryan 2010, 484).

...

The one area where I think TOM does affect people (both NT and AS) is when they, as well intentioned people who take others at their word, encounter people with Cluster B personality disorders. The Cluster B personalities specialise in deliberate manipulation of others, lying, and are often highly skilled at deliberately misleading others. I think it is possible that AS people (for a variety of reasons - (eg AS people seem to have more difficulty setting boundaries with others and enforcing them, perhaps because of less self confidence arising from more adverse experiences during the first two decades of life) coupled with confusion that can obscure their recognition of Cluster B predators who may specifically target them. It is the intention of the Cluster B personality that they always conceal their true intentions in order to achieve their manipulations. And the effects on innocent parties can be dire.

Even so, I dislike applying "TOM" as a label to this predator-prey phenomenon to describe some fault in the prey. Predators are predators, and they strive to conceal and disguise their contempt for others in order to get what they want. The Cluster B's are the disordered ones, not those they prey upon.

[quote="SweetOnSylvia"]
I wanted to know more specifically:

1. When you read a story, do you have difficulty or abilities in being in the shoes of the character? (as a kid and adult?)

Yes. To me, actions based on emotion are chaos. As a child, I thought that people were generally struggling to know and think enough to act according to the Golden Rule, and would never lie to complicate the problem. If I try to write fiction, everyone is as calm as a meditating monk, no matter what is happening. I never lacked for ToM, but I was wrong most of my life, expecting far more logic. I was very dismayed to learn that even the best ideas were not self-evident to others when presented, usually getting lost in a sea of propaganda. Learning about Dunning-Kruger syndrome helped.

2. When you read a story that shifts from one scene to another scene, is it difficult for you to keep track? Why do you think so? (as a kid and adult)

No. I am also good at reading maps and blueprints. However, if I do get lost, it is very hard to get re-oriented, and I am prone to getting lost in the same area again.

3. As a child, was it difficult for you to understand when to use "I" and when to use "you" when talking?

No. I can't imagine such confusion.

4. As a child or adult, did you or do you have trouble figuring out when people are talking about something that is happening NOW, happened in the past or will happen in the future?

Only if they are bad at using words.

This thread was started on 19 Aug 2015 by:
Dysmania
Last visited: 12 Mar 2016.

Yeah, I noticed that, after somebody woke it up. I'd have commented then if I'd seen it.

While I would personally not necrobump a thread this old since this thread is dealing with a relevant issue to the autistic community and not addressing an issue a long gone user was having I do not have a problem with necrobumping this thread.

Necrobumping used to really annoy me when I first started here. With "Similar Topics" listed on the bottom it is obvious that Alex the site's owner encourages necrobumping topics. So I had a choice to make deal with it or find or start another site. Over time I have learned to tolerate it and at times even to accept it to the point of doing it once and awhile.