You all bore me

Post Reply New Topic

Or perhaps they only think they 'grew out of it' ... it can be difficult for someone with it to realize how well (or how poorly) they're doing emulating NT behavior. Many of us think we're a lot better at socializing than we are. This could easily apply to the OP.

I come to this forum to propose something which may stir up a little controversy. Though it is not deliberate, I feel that it should be presented and discussed because its implications are quite significant. The idea is that people can, in some cases, grow out of being autistic(particularly those with Aspergers (for reasons explained a bit later)). This might strike most as dissonant or maybe even a little bit hostile due to what I believe to be the misunderstanding of how diagnostics work. See, a person is diagnosed with a certain disorder or illness only insofar as that disorder has negative effects on the person's life. This is precisely why homosexuality is no longer considered a mental illness(on average, it in itself has no necessary negative effect on the person). This being the case, it would not be correct to diagnose somebody with Aspergers if it has no negative effect on their life (I say this rather than autism in general because autism(as differentiated from Aspegrers) in most cases does tend to have a negative effect). People often make the mistake of thinking that Aspergers has something directly to do with the brain. It doesn't. It surely is a result of neurological abnormalities but it is a mistake to think that these abnormalities specifically translate to Aspergers(I refrain from using the more general 'autism' here because as it turns out, the abnormalities do more specifically translate in that case). I'm actually really curious if anybody can give an answer to what I'm about to ask: How do you figure that one could not 'learn' things such as the subtleties of social cues and non verbal/metaphorical language if they had the intelligence/awareness to understand exactly what they were(and no, not just in the superficial sense of conditioning)? Perhaps this is the difference between people who can and can't grow out of it? In that case it is all a matter of intelligence/self-awareness(which, of course, is far beyond the scope of this current discussion) I say this because I grew up with (at least a mild form of) Aspergers(this much is self diagnosis, but I had all of the symptoms... When I was 5-10, I was obsessed with the MPAA rating system, combustion engines, Garfield, and Arctic Foxes; I had trouble focusing in middle school and did not have any friends(this is strictly up until high school)) but now I simply do not have it(spent 2 weeks at a psychiatric facility whose sole reason to exist was that of diagnosing kids, it was not even brought up. Then afterwards, 6 months at a therapeutic board, switched between 3 different therapists, none brought it up either(even with the knowledge that at the very least a sibling was diagnosed)). My whole immediate family had it and after an extended amount of time I began to notice some things very wrong with the way they behaved. This led to my personal construction of what was socially right and what wasn't. Of course, I still possess very obvious traits of it in some circumstances(look at the length of this, for instance. Or the verbosity or excessive parenthetical remarks. (Haha sorry about this, by the way... if you're actually reading through it all then you're a champ, but to be fair the length/constant remarking is sort of necessary to get my point across.))

This understanding is for the most part adduced by the recent idea that introversion is essentially the highest functioning side of the autism spectrum(the study itself is apparently not available, but here's an article on it [1]). There are so many people that have been in the public spotlight that demonstrate Aspergerian tendencies(see below*). It would be a mistake to understand them as Aspergerian rather than simply 'introverted'. The last point I will make to initiate this is that the way the brain is does not necessarily entail a certain way of being. The brain only ever predisposes. There is no such thing as immutability when it comes to things which aren't evidently physical(i.e. you can't grow back a leg). The point is that even though it might be disconcerting to most because people are naturally defensive over what gives them an identity, you should not convince yourself that you are one certain way, or that you cannot change. It is absolutely unhealthy and self fulfilling. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that conclusively shows that things of this nature are immutable... only the idea that you don't prove negatives and the lack of initiative/funding towards studies that would say otherwise. And as far as why you would want to change... well this might catch a bit of flack but normal is normal for a very good reason... in other words.. normalcy isn't as arbitrary as many of you would probably like to believe... It is what one should in any case strive towards because a normal life is necessarily less difficult than an abnormal one(if you disagree, then you're understanding it wrong(... that sounds a bit harsh in text.. God text just confuses everything)) Anyways, why convince yourself when you can liberate yourself?

[1] - h tt p: //w w w. psychologytoday . c om/blog/the-intro ver ts-corner/201104/compelling-th eory-about-in troversion-extroversion-and-autism

* - There are the foremost notable ones; Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Keanu Reeves, Bob Dylan, Albert Einstein, Isaac Netwon, et al. And then there is this idea that practically any 'introverted' person has tendencies correspondent to someone with Aspergers. A very interesting case in my opinion is Jimi Hendrix, who, as a child, had a very passionate obsession with learning every well known blues song note for note. There are various other aspects of his personality that give to something of an Asperger diagnosis. The point is that he clearly could not be diagnosed with it later in life...
So many other people fit the bill also. Here are a few, who, in my opinion convince me of the idea that this 'introversion' has a lot to do with creativity/genius; Kurt Gödel, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Ian Curtis, Saul Kripke(sort of obvious, though), Georg Cantor, Edgar Allen Poe, Bertrand Russell(these are people who could easily be understood as Aspergerian, among an inumerable other The hypothesis, however, is that everyone who is 'introverted' more or less is).

People often make the mistake of thinking that Aspergers has something directly to do with the brain. It doesn't. It surely is a result of neurological abnormalities but it is a mistake to think that these abnormalities specifically translate to Aspergers(I refrain from using the more general 'autism' here because as it turns out, the abnormalities do more specifically translate in that case).

I'm actually really curious if anybody can give an answer to what I'm about to ask: How do you figure that one could not 'learn' things such as the subtleties of social cues and non verbal/metaphorical language if they had the intelligence/awareness to understand exactly what they were(and no, not just in the superficial sense of conditioning)?

Wow, I don't think that I have the time to answer it all. It's a long post, and, to be frank, slightly offensive. Are you sure that you had Asperger's? You say on your profile that you are Neurotypical. Were you diagnosed in childhood? There is the possibility that you could have been misdiagnosed. A lot was not known about Aspergers years ago. It only really started being in the public eye in 1994, when it was classified in the DSM.



Actually, it was shown in MRI scans that people with Asperger's (no, not Autism) use different parts of their brain to process the same information. There are lovely photographs on plenty of websites that you could look up. Or look here:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 083337.htm
or here:


http://www.emaxhealth.com/1506/advanced ... s-syndrome



I've been trying to do this all my life, even before I was diagnosed with Asperger's. It doesn't mean I don't have it.

Short answer: We think differently. We can learn, but it takes effort to do something with for others comes naturally.

It's just as [or even more] likely that those who do "grow out of it" didn't actually have it to begin with.

The symptoms aren't cognitive based; how you mentally deal with them is, but not the symptoms themselves.

I'll try to grow out of my Autism if you grow out of being an NT.

say this because I grew up with (at least a mild form of) Aspergers(this much is self diagnosis, but I had all of the symptoms... When I was 5-10, I was obsessed with the MPAA rating system, combustion engines, Garfield, and Arctic Foxes; I had trouble focusing in middle school and did not have any friends(this is strictly up until high school)) but now I simply do not have it(spent 2 weeks at a psychiatric facility whose sole reason to exist was that of diagnosing kids, it was not even brought up. Then afterwards, 6 months at a therapeutic board, switched between 3 different therapists, none brought it up either(even with the knowledge that at the very least a sibling was diagnosed)).

I don't even know where to begin other than to say that if you had put this section at the begining of your post it would have saved us from reading a load of crap. I'm not going to bother dissecting your entire post; I'd rather spend the time figuring out how to load toilet paper in my printer so I can wipe my ass with your theories. That's about all they are good for. Come back when you actually understand something about AS

Actually no, we don't outgrow it. I turn 53 this month. If I was going to outgrow it, I would have by now. Many of us learn to cover for periods of time -- build an alternate persona for the workplace -- but then risk burnout if we don't get enough solitary downtime.

Look at his profile. It says nuerotypical. I don't think he is hardly in a position to even criticize us considering he is NT.

It's not about trying or acting, though. It's about actually learning. It's not logical to take something like social intuition and say that it cannot be learned. Anything can be learned.