Common Sense - Instinct - Intuition - 100% Distrust *long*

Post Reply New Topic

Hi!

My son, daughter, I, and my soon-to-be-ex husband are all on the spectrum at various points.

I've been pondering something and am curious as to what others think about it:

Is it possible that rather than lacking common sense (which has a negative connotation), instead we lack the instinct and intuition (which is inherent, it's not learned) to realize that there's something wrong with whatever the situation might be.

What if we have to teach ourselves to distrust? We are a very trusting people even to our own detriment.

I have often felt bad about (not regretted per se but just ponder upon it often) teaching my son to distrust people and what's being said to him. How horrible that is in a "normal world", a parent teaching their child to not trust anyone.

But, a child/adolescent/young adult that doesn't have the ability (the instinct and intuition) to assess a situation well enough to use "common sense" (oh I so don't like that phrase) to deal with something can't make decisions based upon "common sense". It's just not possible.

I believe that it's not common sense that we lack. I believe we have an inability to intuit many situations, and we lack instinct (which would otherwise enable us to intuit).

So intuition and instinct being our downfall so to speak (if I hadn't have been here he would have believed the "parents going to the bar at 1:30 am" lie) I believe that we have to learn to *distrust* everything including people; we have to proactively teach ourselves (proactively teach - is that an oxymoron?) that nothing is as it seems.

If you choose to trust some people and not trust other people, or trust some situations but not others, how are you going to know who to trust and who not to trust when you don't have intuition or instinct. I let my guard down, trusted a kid about my son's age, let him crash on the couch downstairs for quite some time because he was homeless, and he ended up stealing about $1000, did damage to my home, turned out to be a meth addict, and I now currently have a 300' restraining order against him.

Using me and the "Cops" TV show for an example… I *always* feel bad for the guy that has a plausible-sounding story (plausible to me, which doesn't mean it's plausible to other people) and I'm certain that the cops have the wrong guy. I am *always* wrong. But… the next time I watch the show I once again feel bad for those with a plausible sounding story. Without intuition or instinct how do you really know who to believe and who to not believe?

That's why I feel it's not a bad thing to distrust everyone and everything … except maybe one person.

You need someone in your life that you can tell everything to so that they can help you to figure out the right course of action. They don't necessarily dictate the course of action to you, they just explain the true nature of the situation and the various consequences based upon the action taken.

I'd be willing to bet that the majority of us have someone in our life that we tell things to, someone that we trust implicitly, someone that is our go-to person to help us with this (in my case it's a few true friends that I have, and in my son's case it's me that's his go-to person).

As an aside, anyone that doesn't, I'm always happy to try to help with any situation (and I'm often told that I give good advice) so if you ever need to bounce something off of someone keep me in mind…

Anyhow, if we adopt the attitude that nothing we hear or see can be trusted, then we'll take everything to our go-to person which can seriously help keep us out of trouble.

* BUT * -- if we instead adopt the attitude that we'll just decide from person to person who/what you're going to trust we're opening yourself up to some potentially not-so-great consequences.

I really don't want this to come off as a negative post but I'm aware that it probably has to an extent.

I truly am curious as to what others think.

And also please note that it is entirely possible (and maybe even probable) that I worded things incorrectly above so *please* don't be offended by anything, just let me know in your responses what you think I was saying, how you feel about it, etc. Whatever you'd like.

Do we lack common sense or do we lack the inherent ability to intuit and be instinctive?

And do we need to work at distrusting people/situations rather than automatically trusting?

When one considers "theory of mind" it then begins to look more and more like it's intuition and instinct that's missing, which would dictate the necessity to adopt the mind frame of not trusting people/things.

Thoughts?

Personally, my intuition, gut instincts, and first impressions of people are very strong, and have NEVER led me wrong...but that only works when I trust myself and act in accordance with my feelings about things.

The problem is some part of my brain automatically wants to take things literally, at face value, even when my feelings are telling me that something is off about a person/situation.

Like if I get a strong feeling that a person is lying to me (or to themselves), I still have a strong compulsion to take their words literally as if they are telling the truth.

Or say if I get a strong feeling to just avoid someone, but I can't figure out why. Some part of my brain won't rest until it finds out WHY. I feel like I can't accept that feeling until I can find a logical reason to support it.

I think acting on intuition sometimes requires making leaps or assumptions in logic that I am either unable or unwilling to make. My mind wants to run through all the available information first, and wait to see if more information is forthcoming.

But the NT world largely operates on assumptions. A lot of what people call "common sense" isn't really a cognitive skill. It's just a common set of assumptions people learn through social interaction.

People use those assumptions to make quick judgments about other people. As an example, a common assumption nowadays in the US is to be suspicious of young men, especially young black men, who wear hoodies.

I think first off we tend to be less aware of those kinds of social judgments. And when we do become aware of them, we are less inclined to take them on board, because it's not logical to us to categorize other people that way.

I tend to be suspicious of people by default, and only trust them when I've thought about the particular thing I'm supposed to trust them with. I probably look as if I'm trusting people, but if you look closely you'll see that I've already calculated that I can stand to lose a limited amount.

It's different with people I'm very close to (partner, son, and sister), because I know them so well.

I think it's more fun to give people "the benefit of the doubt"--but with, always, a certain wariness.

I like to think I go by a Russian parable that Ronald Reagan always quoted:

Thing is, I generally verify first, and even then have a hard time trusting.

I've been burned so many times in my life that I have become extremely distrustful and wary. I tend to take things very literally and I have a hard time reading body language, so it can be hard for me to tell when someone is telling the truth and/or has my best interest at heart.

I try to stay somewhat pleasant and cordial when I'm out in public, but I never let my guard down.

I'd like to say that I trust God implicitly but I'm not always a paragon of faith either. I probably trust my dogs more than anyone else, including myself.

If it doesn't make it through the filter of rationality, it generally doesn't fly. I don't "follow my heart" on anything if it doesn't get past "mind."

I have noticed something interesting, and a good reason why (in a perfect world) my dog, Clara (the Belgian Malinois) should be allowed to go everywhere I go. She has not been trained or certified as a service dog- and I'd never get away with that one- but I wish I never had to leave home without her. She is so much better at reading people and situations than I am. She is an impeccable judge of character in that if she is averse to someone, they don't mean me well. It also doesn't hurt to travel accompanied by 65# of dog who reads me (and most certainly other people) better than I read myself, if that makes sense.

Then again, I've always preferred the company of dogs to that of humans. They are a lot more transparent and genuine than we are able to be.

I don't tend to rely on people enough to get "burned" too much.

I don't either- any more.!

Yes, I learned to distrust through personal experience, only that. I have realised that in plenty of instances, I would feel "bad" without knowing fully knowing why. I mean, I knew there was something wrong, because what they were doing was making me feel bad, but I did not know why that was happening....

If I were to choose wether to trust you (it does not matter the degree of said trust). I could not know how to properly judge, wether you actually might be trustworthy or not. Well....In here, if someone lies, it is very easy; you would have just to check with their history post and check if what they are telling you matches with what they previously wrote...But, that would only be necessary with someone who you are dealing with at certain moment, and if for whatever reason they appear to be suspicious. Anyway, removing that fact, it is better to not really trust anybody.

With fiction I am very good. I can know most of the time who is guilty, etc. That is because of practice, and learning the pattern of story telling, as everything follows a pattern. Another reason is, because I am merely an spectator, I am not involved with it directly, and I just observe without intererences. There is nobody who can come in to manipulate me into thinking something else, nor deceive me, nor lie to me. It is just watching, observing, and deducing, finding the evidence....A number of steps which have to be done.

Someone who has bad intentions, could tell you some story made up by him/her, whatever, so you feel sorry for him/her. They will want you to believe that they are good, that they are in your side. This is what the culprit can do to not make you suspect about him/her. This is why you should not let your own emotions interfere, because it hinders your logical reasoning. Not letting emotions to cloud your judgement is important to think logically. It is also important to be able to meet your basical needs, and be in good health.

To know to whom to believe in fiction: do not have favoritism, and do not lead yourself by emotions. Watch what they do, there will be someone who does something suspicious, but with attracting other character´s attention, form a theory, and find the evidence, and much more.

Yes, having someone good to help you around must be an ideal. Having your Watson, your next door friend, your Watari, to help you out.....However, it is not good to depend too much on others. There might not always be there, and not everybody can have the help of someone. There are many others who, unfortunately, are alone in this world, and must figure it out everything by themselves. So, I am afraid that you have just lost your bet: not everybody has the "luck" to have any sort of help.

I wonder why would you want to help strangers. I did not find this to be "negative" to read; just a little glimpse of the perception of someone. How I feel about it? It was very bad that that someone took advantage of yourself the way he did. It had to be really bad to experience.

I have not wondered about this before. I am not totally sure how much of common sense I have.....I know I have no natural intuition whatsoever with what regards people/ social things. The little I know, I have learned by myself after learning about AS.

Yes, it is not good to be automatically trusting, because things like what has happened with that boy you described can happen. Not working on distrusting per se....I mean, adapting a paranoid attitude with "the whole world is against me" would not be good either. Just like being automatically trusting is not good. I think that, ideally, someone could be able to reach a balance: not too much, nor too few. So, I think there is the problem: finding the balance. But, of course, if struggling to distinguish who is really trustworthy versus who is not....That is troublesome. Even more so, if you are socially blind.

I personally think that, it is better to distrust, unless you have evidence to not to do so, and being extremely careful about it. Not letting your guard down no matter what, it is also important.

My intuitions especially "first impressions" of people are often completely incorrect. I have read on countless occasions that the huge majority of people have this skill and it is the most significant part of their interactions with others.

Aren't we talking about two different things here. The thoughts of NT's are dominated by first impressions which is the reason so many people are scammed and influenced to the point where they lose all reason. Gut feel and intuition comes from decided deliberation from connecting to the heart and substance of another human being. First impressions wash over me because I don't get another person's body signals. I therefore never make up my mind until I get to know a person. Ultimately my gut feel and intuition about another person's behaviour is more often correct than incorrect. Also, I tend to be more forgiving than other people, because I accept that people make mistakes and are capable of self improvement.

"First impressions" are usually quite wrong in my case.

Frequently, "intuition" is wrong as well.

I think you're confusing trust with decoding. There's a limited number of things NTs say/do instead of the real thing. If you learn what those are, you can decode (translate) most hidden agendas and know a lot better who you can trust. Even a lot better than NTs do with their instinct/intuition/ToM. All you need to teach your child is what those codes are and never to take anything someone says literally, always to check if they're using a code first.

As to what those codes are - unfortunately, aspies are not taught (nor do they tend to share the knowledge between them) so we have to discover them by ourselves, each one of us has to re-invent the wheel along our full lives. I've done reasonably well at it, but it's taken me over 50 years of obsessive observation and analysis of the NT behavior.

Yeah. I am really good at detecting the presence of hidden agendas. I'm just not always adept at decoding what they are.

Hi Moondust! Love your user name!!

I too am over 50 (barely thank goodness!) and wasn't diagnosed until last year or the one before, after it had been 10+ years since my son (now 21) was diagnosed.

I appreciate your outlook on what I posted here.

In this particular case I wonder if "trust" is much different from "decoding". I find it increasingly difficult to not "get taken" and it's by kids my son's age (tricked into giving a place to sleep to a meth addict [my son didn't know, he was tricked as well], trying to be friends with these kids he's hanging with (at least "cool") strictly so that they'll want to hang out (e.g. they get a little loud I don't yell at them, etc.).

I can't decode situations as well as I used to be able to do (to be fair I have been under a *humongous humongous" load for the past 5 years) and have found that losing that ability has cost me and therefore I have to trust no one, nothing, at it's face value. But it is *so very hard* sometimes to not believe face value. Which puts me back at not trusting anyone until they've proven themselves. Sad thing is, some that I thought had proven themselves turned out to have hidden agendas… I'm supposed to protect my son from that and yet I keep getting hit between the eyes and taken advantage of myself.

The problem with teaching your child to learn the codes is A) I myself don't really know what codes are that you're referring to (and I assume that's because of my own difficulty with grasping concepts) and B) sometimes things aren't teachable to some, sometimes my son just can't grasp the concept of something (especially the true meaning behind what someone is saying - he's a huge innocent in that respect). He cannot "decode", he doesn't have the capability (at least not developed yet) to think through what's being said and read between the lines. He very much takes things at their surface so to speak, as do I.

So he has to not trust anyone (which truly is difficult in itself because it's part of the Asperger's/ASD).

A thought Moondust (and please don't think I'm being a smart-aleck, I'm just curious as to whether or not I'm interpreting this correctly or not)…

You wrote that A) you need to learn the "code" and B) you always need to check first to see if they're "using a code".

To me that says mistrust (not necessarily of a negative connotation) of everyone (guilty until proven innocent rather than innocent until proven guilty if you will), and that is not meant to be a derogative remark, just a turn-around of the actual quote and how it ties in with my thoughts here about distrust…

If you have to learn a code and then always check to make sure whether they are or are not "using a code" and if they are then what they truly mean when saying what they're saying, and having to exercise all that just in order to gauge people, is in itself a distrust if not of people then of one's perception of people (at least to me it seems).

Those who don't distrust, often end up in a small group of people who take advantage of the person (not everyone does but it has happened often enough to merit mention).

To me when I trust someone it's an automatic thing and all-encompassing, I don't go through the decoding and I don't think. They're just automatically part of my "posse" if you will.

There's truly no rhyme or reason in how I do it (with my heart I guess) and I have been taken advantage of many times, mostly in my younger years but also now that my son has hit 21 and most kids that age in this town are trouble it seems, I'm getting caught off guard again on a semi-regular basis.

On the flip side, break my trust and chances are you will never gain my full 100% trust back again (it would take a lot and it would depend on my relationship with the person), you will always be on the other side of the fence.

I don't know that many Aspies actually have the capability to explain "codes" to other Aspies because it's already so difficult to understand in itself. One almost has to develop their own understanding (much like a math problem that two different people use two different methods to come to the same conclusion but can't necessarily explain their methods); because just cause one Aspie understands it doesn't mean another does.

I'd say I've done quite well learning and applying those lessons (although I do still have *major* hiccups) because I've worked at it my entire life without knowing what it was that was "wrong" with me.

But I can't teach my son that no matter how hard I try to share the knowledge with him. He still experiences the heartache and then I experience being the target, whether it's me myself, or something that belongs to me, or our "friend" relationship on Facebook (he deletes me and then deletes several other people with an excuse and then comes back later and admits it and re-adds everyone to his friends list).

He gets very angry at me sometimes but regrets his actions and so then lies about why he did it (eg. family members were bugging me about something so I created a new Facebook page and told them all to join that one instead of my regular one), and then "corrects" it.

Anyhow, I love your idea about "decoding Nt's".

Everyone has hidden stuff at some point, and success in life depends largely upon being aware of this and being able to read it somehow, at least some of it. If that in your opinion makes everyone else guilty and makes you distrustful, so you prefer to ignore this fact about human interaction and take everything literal, well...it's your right of course. But you'll live life highly unprotected. Total naivete can be very dangerous.

Hi Moondust!

I don't know that I'm saying that others are specifically guilty of anything (although I realize I used that in my prior post and in hindsight shouldn't have) so much as I'm saying that I feel like we need to distrust what we're being told until we verify it or bounce it off of someone who we trust (as well as their opinions).

Just because we question or distrust it doesn't make the person guilty, the idea isn't to do that. The idea is to get the person who never questions, accepts everything at face value, to take a step back (a lot of steps back) and question everything. In all honesty it's really the only way to learn as long as you have someone who doesn't mind answering what would be a pretty regular series of questions (depending on the needs of the individual).

I just know that every day I am "hit between the eyes" in learning that there's something that my son doesn't "get", and oftentimes it's something that can cause him great harm in the outside world.

Anyhow, just thoughts on my part… Always looking for ways to break through his "barriers"…