Understanding the model NTs operate on

Post Reply New Topic

Start with models (multiple flexible models, there isn't one model) of communication (then go in depth, simultaneously applying them to real life experiences, keeping personal judgements at bay)?

Of course, almost all of these models in essence apply to everyone including autistic people which I think makes them all the more interesting.

That's how I started although my intention to understand "others" was more along the lines of trying to use that knowledge to my advantage on a daily basis for all my dealings with people.

No, you seem quite tolerable

You are what I term a 'bridge person' ie foot in both camps - you are good at explaining the vagiaries of the NT mindset to us as opposed to just sneering and kicking sand in our faces like the average one would!

What an honour! - an NT deems to speak to us!

(I'm just being facetious )

I couldnt be bothered to learn 'the NT ways' - I just knew I had a strong aversion to how most of them thought and acted so just wanted to avoid them full stop! I don't want to interact successfully with these people - that would make me as abhorrent as most of them by default!

This is truly interesting. Many aspies on the WP forum talk about the NTs' apparent (and obviously irritating) lack of focus on and interest in facts. To me it becomes something of a paradox that one of the facts most ignored by aspies is that NTs do not constitute a homogenous group of people. The only thing that may accurately define us in the context of this forum, is that we are not on the autistic spectrum. Beyond that, we're actually as different as everyone else. Countless NTs love facts - they occupy themselves with hard facts on an everyday basis. And that is a fact. And it's been repeated many times. But somehow, that seems to be a fact that some aspies are reluctant to accept.

This is absolutely true. NTs do not form a homogenous group of people who think, feel and act in more or less the same way. There are as many "models" as there are humans. There are thousands and thousands of books written about communication - and that ought to tell you that NTs may also find communication challenging, and that there is no one way to go about it.
NTs do not think in one way. We do not feel the same. There are NTs that hate socializing, but others that love it - most of us are perhaps somewhere along the scale between the two.
Some NTs are good at reading between the lines, others less so. Some NTs use body language a lot, others less so. Some people love facebook, many others do not see the point of it at all.
Bottom line: We're all widely different individuals. The only thing we can safely say that NTs have in common is that we are not austisic. That really isn't much to go by when trying to define us.

I understand the perception/story/judgment/reaction dynamic.

The middle two parts should be in reference to internal dialogue and rationalization. Taking a complicated situation and consolidating it into a simplified story not only assists the individual in understanding, but also in being able to communicate the story to someone else later. The emotion/opinion stage, I imagine, is just a passive response to having the rationalized story. The middle two stages are kind of a natural analog to MP3 format, in which a larger audio file has the inaudible parts taken out of it to lessen the file size, but keep the same music. Continuing with the MP3 analogy, "reading between the lines" is like making a guess at what the previous mind removed during file compression, based on one's own experience in file compression. As for emotions, you are on your own. Personally, I discard them whenever possible, as they have only ever inhibited me from my goals. Sometimes you can use emotions of others to make a guess at how they compress their files. For example: if you meet someone who is always overbearingly optimistic and happy, you can infer that this person discards all of the sad or unfavorable parts of a situation, and only consciously recognizes the happy parts. Using this information, you can regress what likely was the actual situation that this person experienced from their story, an assumption that all situations are naturally neutral, and your own experience with what you can guess are similar situations. Communication is pretty simple once you have learned to work the system. Also, people have a sort of 'auto-sync' feature when they get around one another. This is what conversation is: the exchange of information and attached sentiments until all parties involved believe that sufficient t information has been exchanged and equilibrium has been achieved.

What I don't understand is why, when the facts of the situation contradict their story, so many NTs choose to ignore the facts rather than re-evaluate the story (and the judgment and reaction that follow from it).

Even when it comes to simple, objective information, I see people asking their friends and relatives for answers first and never questioning it-that's the fascinating part. I understand that they're simply inclined to socialize and enjoy getting information from others but believing socially acquired knowledge as fact and even going so far as to believe that facts aren't real or are subjective...truly blows my mind.

Start with models (multiple flexible models, there isn't one model) of communication (then go in depth, simultaneously applying them to real life experiences, keeping personal judgements at bay)?

Of course, almost all of these models in essence apply to everyone including autistic people which I think makes them all the more interesting.

That's how I started although my intention to understand "others" was more along the lines of trying to use that knowledge to my advantage on a daily basis for all my dealings with people.

Why do such people get annoyed or think it is unusual/odd when they experience others questioning the information?

I was answering to the question Cogs asked, I wasn't trying to get you into something you don't want.

However, I am of the opinion (because it happened to me so it's more like personal experience) that some autistic people (and people with other mental/neurological conditions) can be as "abhorrent" as some non-autistic people can be too, especially by hatefully singling out other autistic people who are different from them for being more different, then explaining to others how acting that different makes the person stupid, pathetic, not a real person, so on and how they themselves are nothing like that because they happen to have other autistic behaviours or because their symptoms aren't as obvious or as severe.

I think it really has to do with fitting in with their group. Some NTs take offense to this but it's the way humans evolved(Homo sapien, anyway). The human race has achieved some wonderful things and I enjoy living in a world that NTs have created, I won't deny it, but so much of that has been done by sticking together. I see as NTs as responsible for perpetuating the human race and autistics/gifted people as people who are wired with the potential to improve it(whether they are successful or not is really beside the point).

Neanderthal Theory of AS and ADHD aside, one of the major reasons the Neanderthal died out(aside from being killed off by Homo sapien) was a lack of bonding and communication. The group as a whole probably had a lack of shared knowledge and Neanderthals are said to have done the same thing over and over again without learning from their mistakes, in came the Homo Sapien with a smaller but much more socially adept brain.

That was OT and whether or not anyone gives Neanderthal Theory any credence the story that's portrayed of how they would have lived along side with the Homo Sapien is strikingly similar to how Aspies live along side with NTs IMO.

So the short answer is that they aren't necessarily empty-headed but have a very strong instinct to form bonds and will quite often dismiss facts and information that might make the bonds they have with others less valuable.

This book really explained it very well for me.

http://www.afieldguidetoearthlings.com/

Another point is that, I suppose, the nature of the difference of the mental processes between autistics and NTs is not yet well unbderstood (look at all the competing theories - theory of mind, executive function, systemizing/empathazing, central coherence...).

And, if we don't really know how autistic mind is different from NT mind, how we can know how NT mind is different from autistic mind?