Speaking in non-specifics?

Post Reply New Topic

One thing I tend to do is speak in non-definitive language. Even if I don't use adjectives such as 'definitely' or 'absolutely,' odds are I'll tack on things like 'usually' or 'kind of' or 'probably' or maybe even 'last I heard.' I'm not likely to use absolutes unless I do know something for certain. It actually annoyed someone a couple months ago when they felt like they needed something definitive. If you look at this post, I think you'll probably see it here, too.

I think I do this sometimes because I'm not always sure if I'm not always sure I'm using the right term, largely because I want to leave room for doubt, and often because I have trouble telling whether something is a certain way. Or maybe sometimes because I hate to say something as a definite and then find out I'm wrong.

I have already heard that Aspies (and maybe Spectrumites in general?) tend to hate 'this or that' types of questions because they like to express things in degrees. Does it tend to also creep into the way they express things in general, or is this more of a 'me' thing?

As I'm getting older, I've come to realize that I think in black and white. I see only absolutes and wishy-washy abstractions drive me crazy. I do notice quite a few folks speak in tongues on this site which, of course, usually leads me to ask for a clarification or example. Anyway, I try to avoid confusion by speaking succinctly while eschewing the vague.

I can relate to being excessively non-definitive. I think for me, it's mostly due to a general lack of self-confidence and a somewhat irrational fear of saying someone that offends someone or that someone strongly disagrees.

I'm not sure if this trait has anything to do with being an aspie, at least not directly. I think that's a bit too broad a generalization to make about aspies. I'm not much of a black-and-white thinker myself, but not all aspies are alike, and as you can see, redrobin62 considers himself a black-and-white thinker.

I cultivated this trait for debating purposes, as it drives me crazy when people speak in absolutes on topics that either don't have absolutes, or when making generalizations, which are by nature imprecise. It also makes me more comfortable when writing off the top of my head, as I don't feel quite such a need to fact check myself when I've qualified my statements as being AFAIK or IIRC.

From Autism Today by Nathan E. Ory, M.A.

Many individuals with autism think in "concrete" or "black and white" terms. They like rules. They follow the rules. They expect every one else to always follow the same rules. They like rules that are always the same way.

They don't handle "gray areas." They may not understand well the meaning of language that is ambiguous or abstract. They don't like "wishy-washy," "maybe," "if-then," and "either-or." They frequently become quite frustrated when faced with "sometimes this and sometimes that."

http://www.autismtoday.com/articles/black_and_white.asp

I am very much like you, Scia, but this is one sentence that I don't feel I need to add non-definitive language to because I'm quite sure of it. Oh, "quite" sure, there it is...haha.

If you were to browse through my posting history, I imagine you would see heaps of these adjectives. I find it extremely difficult to say much with conviction and certainty, because I rarely believe something can be known for sure, and I am excruciatingly aware of what I don't know. I think this would be a trait shared by pessimists more often than optimists, and introverts more often than extroverts.

Now the thing is, I can also related to the above description provided by redrobin62. I value truth and facts and concrete terms. These are much easier to work with, and I don't like "grey areas" (e.g. vague instructions are really hard for me to follow)*. But I won't use concrete terms myself just for the sake of making it easier for the person I'm talking to. If the truth is that I don't know for certain, I'm going to feel very uncomfortable if I have to make it sound like I do.


*But, I also get irritated hearing/reading others using concrete terms and definitive language when I know that they don't really know for sure. It sounds arrogant and is a sort of lie, IMO.

I use many of these words in following one of my own rules, which is that if I cannot be 100% on something, I must allow for error or have an approximate amount of "being sure". This came about due to changes of information I dealt with growing up, especially in science class, such as accepting that there are three states of matter (solid, liquid, and gas) and they added a fourth (plasma). It is a personal rule in place to primarily avoid cognitive dissonance, as well as avoid being incorrect or keep an open mind to new changes. I've been told this is also "black and white" though, in that I created this rule to deal with my way of thinking.

This describes my writing style to a 'T'. I always preface things I say with "I feel", "generally", "tends to", "I suppose", "it seems". It makes it feel like I'm being more honest and describing things in a more stream-of-consciousness way. Absolutes and lack of qualifiers make you sound more confident but somehow less honest. It's a trade-off. I suppose I start using less qualifiers when I have a strong opinion. Yea, I just did it again with "I suppose". I kind of go back and forth between using a lot of qualifiers and using a more blunt tone. It has to do with my mood and the level of emotion involved.

Yes, I write that way, too, but I wouldn't call it "non-specific". I think it's actually more specific to be accurate about your level of confidence in something than to speak as if you're always certain. It's also a good way of pre-empting later arguments.

I think there's an important difference between striving for accuracy in this way and being "wishy-washy" and it comes down to how certain you actually are. For example:

I'm probably not going to be there on Saturday, but I'll see how I feel on the day
This statement is not definite, but (assuming you mean it) it's more accurate than just saying "I won't be there". The word "probably" is helpful here.

I'm probably not going to be there on Saturday - I have to be somewhere else, it's really important
This statement is wishy-washy, because you've already decided that you won't be there. The word "probably" only serves to confuses the (aspie) listener.

Last edited by FMX on 01 Jun 2013, 10:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

When I was a teenager and my parents would ask me if I was going to do something I would give them a probability.

Mother - "Are you going to mow the lawn today?"
Me - "It's a 30% chance"
Mother - "Will you be home in time for dinner?"
Me - "70% chance"

It's like giving a weather forecast. Meteorologists I talk to all find it pretty hilarious.

I think you should try it with people. If they're already annoyed with "maybe", "I don't know", or "do I have to decide right now", giving them a probabilistic answer is sure to piss them off even more. You'd figure they'd appreciate the added accuracy and honesty though.

I've always been a black and white thinker, but I add more shades of gray as time passes. Sometimes it's uncomfortable, but it's rewarding to see a richer and more nuanced picture.

lol. I do the same thing.

It's more of a cultural issue than an "Aspie" issue. Some office or debating cultures pretty much require this sort of language, either to avoid causing another worker to lose status, or to avoid endless debates of using obscure examples to disapprove something. See PPR for an example of the later.

Thanks for the feedback.

I'm in agreement with a number of things mentioned. It didn't occur to me that this could be considered more black-and-white, but it does make sense in its own way.

There are some things where I'm pretty 'yes or no,' but I think they're mostly with, say, computers and programming. Less so with things like people because, well, I'm sure a lot of us know how confusing people can be.

And yes, I know that Spectrumites are all different and not everything done is due to Autism. I asked this more out of curiosity. It is interesting to see that, while often considered 'black-and-white thinkers,' there do seem to be a number of Aspies/Auties that prefer 'somewhere in-between' language.

(I don't think I've used percentages or fractions in my speech except when they seem to be expected, though I admit they could be helpful in some situations. )

I tend to prefer 'somewhere in-between' language now that I'm older.

Giving percentages was my way of acting like a teenage smartass. You'd think if people were logical they would appreciate being given precise probabilities. I mean, it seems better than lying and saying you've made up your mind just to get them off your back, and then having them get upset when you don't keep your supposed "promise".

Outside of formal logic, mathematics and simple instructions, there are very few things you can truthfully and accurately say in a few sentences. Using qualifiers can be used for brevity - you acknowledge that what you're saying is a simplification or that there are certain unknowns. Conversely, by omitting the qualifiers, you pretend that what you're saying is the whole truth. Qualifiers are also about humility and acknowledging that one may be wrong about something (which, lets be honest, everyone is a lot of the time).
Personally, I filter opinions and texts by their use of qualifiers. Whenever I read something that has none, I tend to think that the author is either trying to push an agenda (which includes trying to look smart and knowledgeable to other people) or has an incomplete (and often incorrect) understanding of the subject matter.

I always feel relieved when I read a well-balanced argument, because all too often it feels like everyone is absolutely convinced of their opinions and "knowledge" (I feel like I should mention the Dunning-Kruger effect here).

On the other hand, in the context of business (and many other) decisions, you often need a definitive answer - you're not interested in the absolute truth but in an actionable approximation. In that case, you're being asked for an executive summary - personally I try to give a recommendation while still explaining risks.