Any thoughts about this picture?

Post Reply New Topic

I do actually like it...

But AS isn't associated with intelligence. I mean, sure, the people with actual developmental delay are excluded, but giftedness isnt really any more common on the spectrum.

What we do have, which might look like giftedness, is the willingness to "lecture" about our specialties, and the tendency to have those specialties in the first place, and to become experts on them. That's a useful trait, but you can't call it intelligence the way you call gifted NTs "intelligent".

If you want a word for the type of cognition involved with Asperger's, I would use the word "specialized".

I don't like it because it makes it seem like Asperger's is not a serious disability but just similar to being a nerd or a geek (a smart person who's socially awkward). This is inaccurate and if people think this way they will dismiss problems people with AS have.

I'm in agreement with Callista, in fact I might go a bit further. I'm kind of uncomfortable with the whole idea of using a Venn diagram itself for something like ASD, or for any other condition I can think of where nobody I know manifests ALL the symptoms of it; matters are just not that cut and dried.

Maybe I'm a bit sensitive to this because I'm not quite sure I'd meet enough of the APA's DSM-5 ASD criteria to merit an official diagnosis? I did get officially diagnosed as having Asperger's via a battery of tests and interviews, but the goalposts have seemingly moved just enough that I'm now a bit less confident of what sort of result I'd get out of the neo-Kraepelinian pinball machine that is the DSM.

To try and look at matters from a different perspective, which I can do if it is a matter that doesn't hit me personally, but boy is it difficult if it does (as this one did when I first glanced at it) ... If the image is meant to be taken more as a sort of "just for fun" type of exercise, I guess it would apply to a fair chunk of the folks I've met at support groups or even read the posts of on this site. Would I apply it to myself? Hard to say, but probably not. Would others apply it to me? Even harder for me to say, so I'll not even go there.

And I do like the "van down by the river" notation at the bottom. And "neek" is a new one on me. I'd never seen or heard of it before.

I don't think there is any actual difference between those terms such as nerd, geek, dork etc. they are interchangeable, not intended to be varying degrees of one thing. I don't think there even is a term 'neek'.

Don't see the point of overlapping circles for this?

Last edited by whirlingmind on 03 Apr 2013, 8:54 am, edited 1 time in total.

More labels, how useful..

The whole chart is wrong IMO. Does it mean that geeks are not that intelligent?

Whoever created this diagram seems to have made up the term 'neek' by combining the words nerd and geek. It's supposed to be a combination of all three but I don't see where the term dork fits into that made up word.

I get that it's meant to be a combination of two of the words, but I've never heard of it before, it sounds utterly made up and is just a stupid word basically.

I see it as they get the "n" from "nerd", the "ee" from "geek" and the "k" from dork, but that's just me (I love wordplay.)

It's very...symmetrical?

That's about it.

Seriously, I'm not sure this attempt at categorization is at all helpful. Too many labels and little boxes already.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONEYGU_7EqU[/youtube]

Last edited by conundrum on 04 Apr 2013, 12:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

These labels are good for nothing on a personal level. If you really want to know people better do not label them. Even if they are autistic, geeky or whatever else it all is about getting to know people better. I never felt any connection to the outside world and pretty much did have any unless I reach out to people. It rarely happens other way around. I think if someone wants to know the other person truly well then they must know the person beyond some random demented psychiatric label, not to mention that people obsess about these labels and forget who they really are. It is not necessary to know people with labels, but language works that way. It is label language. I even tried to invent a new working language just for the sake of better communication with people. Too bad I lost the papers.

It depends on what you define as intelligence.

For example: Personally I am not a fan of IQ tests as they are flawed in a number of ways. One such flaw relates to the fact that I don't believe a persons intelligence is static and feel that it can fluctuate from time to time depending on educational background, whether they had enough sleep, if they have the flu etc an just about any other factor that can affect the brains ability to 'perform' at optimal levels. There may be an upper limit they can reach but that is not always measured by an IQ test as such. Also it tells you nothing about how that intelligence will manifest itself or how it will combine with the persons personality traits, environment and background and so on.

IQ test scores mean nothing to me. They just tell you how good the person was at answering that particular set of question on that particular day.

Secondly I don't consider memorising facts and then reiterating them to be a sign of intelligence as such...more a sign of a good memory. Personally I look for understanding of the material, ability to use what one knows in a variety of ways and an ability to develop lines of thought or generate individual ideas based on said material.

Just memorising it means very little.

I also look for versatility. The ability to transfer skills from one area to another, even if a little adaptation or tweaking is needed to do so.

--------------

I also like to develop a variety of skills, hence why I have jumped from one academic subject or one course to another over the years...I have tried my hand at everything from painting and decorating, to computer skills, to typing skills, to business admin, to the hard sciences, to the soft sciences to the humanities and so on. I achieved even grades in most of the subjects (A grades or distinctions with the occasional B grade chucked in...oh and in one instance I got a C but it's that is unusual for me so I generally ignore it ). I was also labelled as exceptionally bright and extremely intelligent by my schools and colleges and started school slightly early due to my level of ability.

As a chlid I tested as having an advanced level of ability in a number of areas and had a wonderful memory to go with it (no need to revise to get those A grades and indeed I have never revised for an exam in my life...to date anyway).

Am I ASD or NT, I have no idea, I have trouble socialising (often due to my different way of thinking...) and have various traits of an ASD such as intense interests and physical sensitivities. I am also very emotionally sensitive as well.

But if what you mean by Specialised intelligence includes a deeper understanding of the material and the ability to come up with original thought related to it then I would say that qualifies as being intelligent or even gifted (depending on the level ability present) NT or otherwise.

If on the other hand you mean just being able to memorise and reiterate the information flat...well, not so much, no. To me that implies a good memory (as I said above).

Excuse any typos in my last post. I would edit but my internet connection is far too slow this morning and it is quite frankly testing my patience to its limit.