Aspie males are notorious for putting themselves down.

Post Reply New Topic

APA or MLA format?

Cause and effect is only useful in a small scale, but when it comes to more complex processes, the best model to describe it is interaction.

For instance, determination would mean a person has no influence on their fate, but as a matter of fact, everybody is changing all the time. If this wasn't true, nobody could ever quit smoking or change their diet, or any habits, also nobody would have an idea or vision. But we do develop, nobody can deny it. And we make decisions about the ways in which we develop. That is, what we are today is not exactly an effect of former causes but as well a result of decisions we make, and those decisions are interactions. We choose from a seemingly immeasurable range. At least from a certain age on, when we are capable to make own decisions.

The statement of "I tried and failed, tried and failed, and so on, how can i succeed without success," is a counterproductive generalization. Lack of confidence and low self esteem are just tags. But there would be appropriate ways to work on those issues.

There are a number of variables when it comes to dating. For instance, the location where one is looking, the way of approaching, the question of timing, to name just a few. If a guy is a bookworm and looking for a date in a disco, this won't work out!

It would be advisable to analyze what's going wrong and why is it going wrong in detail, step by step, and then changing it, trying something new. This approach would also change the outcome, e.g., looking in other places or trying something new, like dating sites.

The idea of determinism means to make the same mistakes again and again and then blaming fate (or the past) for the outcome.

As far as i know, the model of interaction is based on cybernetics, the study of feedback. Grossly simplified, it boils down to the knowledge that living beings receive a steady stream of information and take influence by changing their behavior. As a result, the feedback changes.

Whether we are using the subconscious and self--fulfilling prophecy as a model, as Asp-Z describes it, or the LoA, based on the findings of quantum physics, or the following proverb, doesn't matter.

Watch your thoughts, they become words.
Watch your words, they become actions.
Watch your actions, they become habits.
Watch your habits, they become your character.
Watch your character, it becomes your destiny.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systems_psychology

Give it to me in both formats and if it is not possible than APA.

[/quote]
Where I'd disagree - determinism isn't an argument that nothing ever changes, its only an argument that all changes are essentially accounted for since - relative to our universe - the big bang. It doesn't mean a person can't quit smoking, it doesn't doesn't mean a person couldn't quit heroin, it doesn't mean that a kid raised in poverty couldn't have something happen on a particular day where his life is changed and he/she ends up a multi-millionaire entrepeneur or that the person who was 300 lbs sitting on their couch isn't a world-class triathelete ten years later. What determinism is, however, is essentially a statement that their paths are static. When people have major changes in their lives - the precise moments, methods, timing, and outcomes, were fixed from the moment history was set in motion and in effect the past, present, and future are all history - we only 'feel' like the movie itself is open-ended because we're a bit like accidental Oscar winners, we don't know the script, aren't watching the DVD, and likely in any sense never will.

Didn't mean to drag that in too much of a philosophical direction; just that determinism really isn't a viable excuse for negativity. If someone really hates their lives they'll at some point take action - hopefully more often than not its a tipping point where they hit rock bottom and come to an understanding that the only direction go in is up; that's not always the case but its the preferred outcome in most senses. Regardless of what that outcome is - whether someone can handle making excuses for themselves 70 or 80 years nearly from womb to tomb, also, is something that a person doesn't chose and where most people who could never stomach that thought (myself included) have to consider themselves fortunate.

The other catch, you're asking me for about a month worth of my time. I think $500 would be a fair call. Put it in escrow, I may ask for a certain percentage (<50%) as a down payment for good faith. To make it clear though I'm not writing a lengthy dissertation on half a decade, what I was able to figure out, and the deductive reasoning methods, techniques, and objects of test without some kind of fair compensation for my time and efforts.

Also, if you do still say yes give me a few days to double-check with a contract lawyer to make sure we have an appropriately binding document; nothing personal, its just one of those little things in life that helps keep friends friends .

I agree with most of this, but a good attitude does not always equal success. What if someone is in prison for life? What if they have a painful illness? Or what if they have incurable mental problems? How would a positive attitude help in these situations? I think that is one reason people do not put more effort into changing their attitudes - because it likely wouldn't make any difference.

Right but - they were predestined to be that way and have those beliefs since the beginning of time; just like everything they ever thought or heard that lead them there was just as much le destine. We as human beings have a great internal need for some reason to believe in a cosmic justice - that ends up breaking down often with people simply ignoring what they don't want to see, and quite often, people they don't want to see for validation of their point. Unfortunately though whether we feel an inherent need for cosmic justice has little to do with the reality of whether such a cosmic justice exists outside or on any level above our own minds. Its not to say that we no for certain the the universe has all the sentience of a tennis racket, just that we have a long way to go before we have broadly acceptible proof that there is some type of uniform destributive moral justice ebued into its fabric.

Oh I agree. I believe in determinism, that free will is an illusion and thus no one can be held morally accountable for their actions. It's just that you wrote, "determinism really isn't a viable excuse for negativity. If someone really hates their lives they'll at some point take action". I just meant that some people do not have it in their characters to ever change their attitude-under any circumstances. And also that attempting to improve one's attitude may not actually lead to positive results.

I understand. I did not know it would take you all of that time. I do not want to inconvience you. I have other things I need to spend that money on anyway so I will have to say no right now. I may say yes in the distant future. I will keep your screen name. If you have something of value like this please get it peer reviewed.

Ah, right. I guess the way I phrased that was more geared to interface with something PTS was saying (I felt like I was getting a victim-mentality readout of it and felt the need to say "No relation", at which point I probably oversteered it a bit).

I might not have much to peer review on this hand though. I still remember an organizational psychology teacher back in college talking about studies she'd read, and I'd seen similar thing in psychology books, where the establishment has been coming to understand that - for human beings across the board - our strengths are much more malleable than our weaknesses. It goes to the same extent that many people could practice sprinting 12 hours a day for years and they'd never be an Olympic sprinter, or they could practice guitar that often but they'd never be a Vai or Clapton simply because its just not something they can do. That was added onto by what that particular organizational behavior teacher mentioned - that they've found this along intelligence performance metrics and that the return on investing wholeheartedly into trying to make a weakness disappear (and likely even fail the attempt) would get far more yield working on strengths.

From that standpoint I did all I could to make myself an extrovert, did all that I could to think like an NT, did all that I could to make myself selectively crass and macho the way I saw the guys who seemed to be where I wanted to be had things, and I found out that no matter what I did or even how badly I was willing to punish myself for failure - the me I grew up as couldn't be thrown out even if there was nothing I hated more than the person I was previously. Back then as well I guess I still had some shreds of theistic belief, didn't believe in just how strong of a grip either genetics, childhood development, or both have. At a minimum, whether its either of those; you can look at the studies of ferril children - just a few months of wolves raising them and they've been shown to have irreversible cognitive deficits, similarly they've shown that if you miss certain age-window constrained development you may never be able to thread sentences together properly just because the neural gearing needed will be absent - forever. It was because I was still arrogant and naive enough to believe that I could be anything I wanted to be (and yes, I suppose my friends as well and how superior we felt off of looking at ourselves vs. all the other people without having achieved much of anything at that point), that I ended up reinventing the wheel and finding out - empirically, what its like to run your absolute hardest at an obstacle, whether its someone who can't play basketball willing to spend 14 hours a day practicing for the pros, or me who felt that I only had two honorable roads ahead - either cure myself of Aspergers or work so hard that I die from neurological failure (overwork) in the process of trying to get there. I can asure you neither happened.

If this is true then how can we expect NTs to be aspies or understand aspies like some of us expect them to do? Not all NTs are the same and not all aspies are the same. None of us are like the borg. It gets into even more complexity once you start grouping aspies and NTs into various subgroups.

I like to sleep under the bed.

Yeah, me too. Throughout my life, from pretty early on, the pattern has been that anyone who gets close to me hurts me and then leaves. That sends a pretty strong message after a while and it's hard not to give into it and start getting self-destructive. But, really, when the world is kicking you around is when you most need to learn to love yourself and understand that you are worth something, independent of whatever other messages you're hearing. I'm still very much a work-in-progress in this regard, but there is a big part of me that still believes it's possible to figure out.

We can wish in one hand, do something else in the other (trying to be clean here), and see which hand fills up faster.

Its not that they'll *never* understand us, but we have a lot of competition from other groups all over the world; as you put it they're saddled with their own problems, they're all different. I think the only way they'll be able to really 'get' us is when some medical genius is able to figure out exactly what's going on in the autistic mind and who has the social skills to be able to explain it in 'layperson' language accurately. Obviously as well you have all types of people - some, many, will never care about anything but themselves anyway to trying to explain autism, trying to explain epilepsy, trying to explain peanut allergies, trying to explain diabetes - you're talking to a wall in that case and those people will always be those people.

Are you the same SadAspie who was banned?

If you are, then damn I thought you would never come back after the people here treated you badly.

If I were you, if people treat me bad in a public forum then I just don't bother to come back.