opposite of ASD

Post Reply New Topic

You are using the royal "we" ehhhh?

When debating, care should be taken when judging someone's method of communication. Using a metaphor, this is like a sandwich made up only of bread.

In law, an example of a SG in your local community would be someone like a judge or lawyer.

Social interchange is a constant exchange of information and assessment. Is social interchange all selfish in nature? You could make the same argument about language, we only communicate for selfish purposes. The issue is such not a black and white one, as it has been made out to be.

I agree, Social genius is not just about social manipulation of people. It involves some truly humanitarian concepts at times as well, such as self sacrifice, greater love for mankind than oneself.

You get those that are very good at game playing, such as the politicians, lesser (potential, not all are), manipulators like sales people, but you also get those that make people happy, such as a musician that can pour forth feeling in verse and melody, and the comedian that through pointing out the foibles of human nature, eases our self/social anxiety(all people, not just ASDers).

Again, you have those that serve a higher purpose, figures like Ghandi, mother Theresa.. a good Autism example would be Temple Grandin. Through her unique talents, she plays advocate for animals, using her shared style of perception to inform humans of how to ease the lives of animal stock. She is an animalitarian, so to speak.

Remember, please, that we are just at the beginning of human(self) understanding, and all ranges of human mind and thought need to be classified, understood and catalogued. It is quite likely that to say social genius is like saying autism.. its far too wide a brush to paint an accurate picture.

Your right they arent all manipulative but think about this.

Say social geniuses make up less than 1% of the population (its true for ASD so why not?). And among NTs less than 1% are resistant to the herd mentality and can be altruistic.

So less than 1% of 1% of the population means... your likely to never meet one in your lifetime.

Poor math, even worse definition of altruism. People of all flavours are altruist to varying degrees. Ever stopped to help someone with a flat tire? altruism. Helped a friend move? Altruism. Given money to charity? Altruism. You dont have to jump on a grenade to display altruism.

and 1% of 1% is one in 10 000.. That means that there would be 4-5 in my town alone, with many others that approach that. Have I met some? Yes, And I bet you have too. And 1% is far too low. I know there are more than 5 autistics in my town, and since I exhibit altruism(and many ASDers and regular NTs), your 1% altruistic limits are off as well.

Arguing the math is a red herring.

If you had an extraordinary ability to manipulate others and benefit from it and everyone around you reinforced the bad behavior by congratulating you for your success why wouldnt you be greedy?

To me an altruistic person is one who, when given the choice, more often than not will choose to help others at their own expense.

Those people are much more rare than 1% and are mostly already pretty much precluded from being "SGs" due to probably belonging to the ASD spectrum.

Besides you said it yourself 1% of 1% may be 1 in 10,000 but thats still 1 in 10,000 people a needle in a haystack. Sure they exist but what are the odds you'll ever meet one in your life? About 1 in 500 since most people make about a total of 200 friends in their lifetimes.

Many ASDers study behavoir for the very purpose of fitting in... being congratulated, as you put it. That doesnt mean they are manipulators. Soem even get pretty good at it, but it hardly makes them evil. Another way to put it is that knowledge does not lead to evil. Nor does talent. There is no Nth degree of social genius that allows one to escape social consequence.



And this describes anyone that has ever helped some else.

I picked up a guy that hit the ditch in a snow storm, drove him 20km out of my way, and then drove back. that cost me fuel, and since I was late for work because of it, cost me wages too(21 dollars). Was my boss mad? No. he felt that was the right thing to do, and he would have as well. But I still didnt get paid.

The point is, many people hit the ditch, or get flat tires, or jsut break down along the road, and yet, they dont have to wait for 10000 or more people to drive by until someone stops to help. They dont need blonde hair and a pretty face to elicit help either.



AS is far more common than 1% and so would be SG.



Most people have an aquaintance list of about 10000 people at any given time.

But both our numbers could be BullS, because the term aquaintance and friend dont have rigid enough definitions to allow for real numbers quoted like 10000 or 200.

Again, your quoted definition of altruism defines a good 25% of the population.

Your not understanding.

How many homeless people do you walk by every day and not give any money? More than half of them? Then your not altruistic.

How often do you lend money to strangers when your unsure whether or not your going to be able to pay the rent? less than half the time? Your not altruistic.

Sure everyone has an altruistic moment or two where they lend a hand (usually to make them feel better about themselves) but very few do it at nearly every opportunity at their own expense.

The problem is its not considered evil. People admire those with great manipulating skills though they dont call it that they call them "businessmen" and "leaders".



Last I heard the highest estimation for everyone on the ASD spectrum was 1 in 166 (most are more like 1 in 200 or more) which is 0.6%.



You can identify and name 10,000 normal (not famous) people? Wow.

Yes, good observation! I was thinking about this today. Here is a group that should also be mentioned, they often are SGs or at least socially gifted, and I am talking about a lot of mothers out there. I don't mean to sterotype but heck, I going to do that, because 99 times out of a 100 it is the female parent who really advocates for their child. They hold families together, and nurture their children, make and hold connections to society at large. And don't forget about those in the arts and in entertainment.

You could say they are all manipulative or at least working on self interest....but that is just plain wrong. Many devote their lives to their craft or families. They too are also part of the glue that holds society together. They enrich us all.

So enough about manipulative SGs...sure there are plenty out there but I am afraid too many are relying on sterotypes. To prove it, name one group of people that are truly gifted and have no fault. And hey, don't answer me by saying Saints.

You are not defining Altruism correctly. Where did you get the 50% from?

from dictionary.com...
altruism  /ˈæltruzm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[al-troo-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation

–noun 1. the principle or practice of unselfish concern for or devotion to the welfare of others (opposed to egoism).
2. Animal Behavior. behavior by an animal that may be to its disadvantage but that benefits others of its kind, as a warning cry that reveals the location of the caller to a predator.

Nothing about percentages, nothing about assured personal loss. Possible risk, but not always. That warning cry could be made from the safety of a tree, and its still altruism. Besides, Altruism is not a state of being, it is a behavior at a given instant.

Mother Theresa is the ONLY person I can think of that spent most of her waking day in the service of others. She was one in 4 billion, and she still had to stop and eat, and tend to personal needs such as showering.

link: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Altruism



Again, that is not the definition of aquaintance. You dont have to know them by name, only to recognise them. There is no needed profound knowledge, nor even mutual, just a bare recognition, but it also includes all your friends, family, co-workers, school mates, people you have encountered before while shopping, people that ride the bus with you, et cetera, ad nausea. If you dont think "who the hell is this?", thats an aquaintance. It might not be mutual.

And what if I do know famous people? They count.

I was a bouncer for 4 years, I did meet a lot of people, but that probably only tacks on a few thousand.

The thing is you may be able to recognize a significant number of people (10,000 is a very high number but Ill give you that since Im feeling generous) but if you cant even identify them what makes you think your going to be able to tell they are "SG"s?

Ive been autistic for 27 years and right now there are 3 people on earth who know it (other than all of you who wouldnt know me if I walked up and started talking to you).

In any case you have the right to be idealistic I get that way myself sometimes but dont let it lead you to self-deception.

Reality is never as pretty as you percieve it to be.

What are you talking about? Are you saying that the person who drowns kittens and lets one live on a whim is just as altruistic as the person who spends all their free time working for charities and feeding the homeless?

Theres a difference between an altruistic personality type and a random aberrant act of altruism.

But if you need to delude yourself into beleiving that you are a good person because you occasionally help people but usually just ignore their suffering hey dont let me stand in the way.

Hmmn...

I was more selfish in childhood because I assumed everyone around me was lieing and fooling me, and thought I was disabled because I couldn't speak easily the way most did.

As I get older (22 in a few weeks) I'm becoming very altruistic, I continue to help strangers without any reward in the moment, it also feels beautiful to offer advice or wisdom through the net to someone I've never seen.

Anyway onto the topic at hand:

Socialising itself can't be evil, like any tool it can be used for negative purposes.

Geniouses of all kinds involve wonderful as well as horrible people surely.

monophobia would be close. A kind of morbid fear of being alone.