Neurotyping and Moral Development

Post Reply New Topic

Am I simply trying to rationalize?

Or are you putting your spin on things?

Where do you get the idea that the author is deliberately saying, "I like emotionally abusing people, and I have the right to do so"? That's not at all what he's saying.

Have you ever been in a situation where you meant no ill will? Yet, someone misunderstood what you were saying, didn't like how it made them feel (based upon their misconception) and used it as an excuse to get nasty or hostile or even violent toward you?

And would others sort of give that individual a pass? "I can see where he's coming from. He thought you were offending him, so I get it."?

If not, you probably don't get it.

I think it is this. People change, and if you read baby books. People are born selfish, they need to be taught to share. So if they can be changed, then I can only conclude that people are in different stages of what they are exposed to. Some people work things out for themselves, I speculate they are observing others. Thus reflecting on themselves and asking if this is what they want in their lives. So they know then only that they do not want it. Anyway, that is my take on it.

AS don't respond to approval? If that's true, then I can't be AS. Honestly, approval of others is always one of the #1 thing I've sought. The only place I was really able to find it was at school, so even though I am very smart, I made sure I got the highest grades I could. When I got a teacher who didn't seem to like me, it made me hate her class.

Yes I've always been an approval junkie too

I love getting praise and hate criticism and being ignored

People pleaser, that's me. I always seem to overdo it

I'm not TheSperg, and I can't speak for him, but I think I get the gist of what he's saying.

It's common for NTs to base their sense of self on how others perceive them...or how they think others perceive them. This doesn't mean that they can't self-reflect, but they give more clout to how they're viewed by others (or how they think they're viewed by others).

And rather than reflect on their behavior in a particular situation, NTs will often rely on a cumulative total supplied to them by others:

"I can't be in the wrong in this situation, I can't be a bad person. So many people have told me how kind and caring I am."

"So many people tell me how smart I am, so I can't be incorrect here, my opinion has more worth than his because people see me as smarter, so I am, and so I'm right."

I think those with AS are constantly wondering how they feel and how they're perceived and how they're behaving in regards to others, rather than assume absolutes about themselves based upon the average of social feedback.

"Did I do the right thing in this situation? Was I really at fault? Did I do the wrong thing here? Was he right to get angry with me, or is he in the wrong." It's also more situational for the person with AS.

I do not claim that all neurotypicals think a certain way. Obviously there are many good rational liberal neurotypicals and irrational reactionary aspergers. My point was that there is something in neurotypical thinking that lends itself to hierarchy. Sexual harassment can still be assault. As for verbal abuse, it would depend on the social contract in play with the individual. If you do not accept the other person's right to throw verbal abuse back at you then you cannot give it to them. That would simply be hypocrisy.

That's fine when stealing is the only way to save someone's life but how often is there only one solution? There are more situations where you can save a person's life by stealing than there are situations in which stealing is the only way to save a life.

Do you have any evidence for that? Because from what I've seen, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between thinking hierarchy is acceptable and whether you're AS or not.

Unfortunately, I can't find any research studies into how NTs and AS compare on authoritarianism. Do you know of any data about that?

[/quote]Do you have any evidence for that? Because from what I've seen, there doesn't seem to be any correlation between thinking hierarchy is acceptable and whether you're AS or not.

Unfortunately, I can't find any research studies into how NTs and AS compare on authoritarianism. Do you know of any data about that?[/quote]

Part of the point of the post was to make a logical argument that an insistence on universalizing principles leads to a more equitable system for the simple reason that if we reduce everyone to an algebraic "a" then there is no reason why one "a" should be hire than another. Historically there is strong evidence as to the influence of the scientific revolution on democratic thinking. If people are simply atomitized individuals obeying universal laws just like physical particles then one person cannot be better than another and the same sort of laws most apply to all. (Adam Smith's sociology is straight out of Newtonian physics.) In terms of personal anecdotal evidence, my experience has led me to believe that there is a correlation between being an Asperger and being a libertarian. This is not to say that all or even most Aspergers are libertarians or that all or most libertarians are Aspergers.