subjectivity of emotions + going against the grain

Post Reply New Topic

I wanted to make a positive post but I prefer it to be constructive rather than just patronising remarks. I cannot criticise anyone for wanting to question ideas, which is an essential quality in my view. So fire away…

These are thoughts, observations, and experiences I have built up over several years. In order not to make it too laborious to compose (ironic I know ) I’m going to start with subjectivity of emotions topic, and then follow up with going against the grain in due course.

It is not going to be specifically about Love and Dating, however this is the best place for it because people will be looking for it here, and I know that many people place a higher priority on this area than other things, including friendship. I believe it may help as a whole.

Let me introduce the idea of the subjectivity of emotions. Humans are open to influence, including self influence. However the doesn’t change the fact emotions can be entirely subjective and you can use your susceptibility to influence and a mechanism to keep them in check. I do this all the time. Don’t worry I’m not talking about glittery things like hypnosis and NLP, and I don’t claim to be a guru.

There is no such thing and a formula or reference that dictates that x situation will result in y emotions. Yes it is true the brain chemistry and predisposition plays a part, however I believe it will always be movable to some degree, even if it is just a fraction, and there will be other times where you can do a whole lot better than that.

My situation is less than ideal (which I won’t get into), however I not one to give up and very few things could stop me regardless of how long it takes. I just know for my mental wellbeing I have to look after myself. I’ve had to find way to cope. It is a continuous dynamic thing, but it works for me for the most part. This topic is just an introduction to the concept rather than me trying to transpose specific techniques which may ore may not work on some else.

I’m not claiming to be confident all the time. I’m not, however I know I can be and there are times when I can induce it very fluidly. It is not something that people that close to me would be that aware of, because it is something that is personal / internal and a means to an end, i.e. coping with whatever comes up.

Regardless of “tricks” just think of the idea of the subjectivity of emotions for a minute. It should be music to your ears…unless of course you are too cynical…though actually inherent cynicism needn’t be a barrier. You don’t actually have to believe it to be true; you just have to suspend disbelief.

I was teetering on calling this topic The Power of Delusions, the only sticklers being it made it sound bit like a old self help audio cassette and it wouldn't have been comprehensive.

One major observation into human behaviour that I have found, which actually backed up with some evidence, is the idea than humans are constantly in a state of mild delusion. Far from being unhealthy it is an entirely normal thing to do. If you think about it, the truth is often so complex, it is too arduous to establish in any reasonable time frame, even with my over-clocked hyper-analytical mind. It is not just taking short cuts, a lot of the time people will just come up with something that fits for them for that moment and them move on. It just helps them get through it, when they wouldn’t otherwise know. The truth will set you free, but if you are over exposed it is like wading through quicksand and you can succumb to mental illness very easily. Obviously I don’t fly this way most of the time. I’m not built to be over simplistic, but I accept the evitable neurosis in order to make these observations, and then try my best to negate this and other bad feelings with coping strategies I’ve come up with myself.

There were interesting findings where they got happy-go-lucky people together with people with the common mental illnesses such as depression and anxiety, and asked each of them what they thought the other peoples’ perception of them was (having first found that out). What they found was that people with the depression and anxiety gave surprisingly accurate answers, and the happy people not very accurate all. However, as they happy people don’t have this impression holding them back, like a self-fulfilling prophecy, and therefore are more successful in their endeavours.

“Depressive realism” is a controversial topic and I’m not suggesting for a minute that they always exhibit good judgment. But in this instance they are just reporting the obvious: In any arbitrary encounter the likely impression is not much, unless it is mutually stimulating. What they often fall short is inability to see this behaviour within themselves, so naturally they can feel a great sense of injustice and frustration when in fact everyone is behaving like the animals they are.

The other day I was feeling pretty sh***y all of a sudden. If you have wider concerns even the most trivial thing can set you off, and this was as trivial as can be. I was just steeped in horribleness, and wasn’t at all clear headed, in a catatonic like daze, being unable to focus on or know what I was doing out shopping. I just go what I though I might need, and got home.

I realised what I had to do at this stage, as I have done numerous times before, and that is not let it fester a second longer. Early intervention really pays off with sh***y feelings. I use various interruption techniques, anything to disrupt thought patterns that I don’t need to be having. You need to blast it pretty intensely. It is kind like pulling strong magnets apart, or shunting a heavy train. You need to a big burst of force to get going but after that the momentum makes it difficult to stop. Without the early intervention, the resistance is too strong and the motivation to little. You become immobile. There are other techniques to break down “The Wall”, which I could discuss later.

As for deluded behaviour, as a as an extension of my analytical mind I go though many hypothetical situations in my head constantly, many baring no relation to me and not necessarily that healthy, though some of the time I make myself laugh. I try to take advantage of this feeling and magnify it (which you can get better at). It has posed useful in awkward situations to raise my sprits and walk with my head up. It can work quite well while I’m walking down the street on my own, as pacing helps me think better anyway. But if you can’t do this at that time, just do something simple like repeating a number plate that you see over an over, or focussing on the sensation at the at the tip of you nose.

Another thing that has improved my confidence greatly is martial arts, although for several years give me quite a bit of apprehension and anxiety too, which relates to the next topic “going against the grain” as to why I stuck with it.

Excellent, truly excellent.

I love how you detail out the interaction between optimistic, somewhat delusional frame versus 'depressive realism.' As you've accurately described, it is possible to dance between those frames, and gain the huge benefits of both. It ain't perfect, but it's better than living in just one.

I look forward to the next part! However, I think it'd also be good to read more details about how you go about 'breaking down the wall,' and the perspectives that allow you stay vigilant, and know when to act.

Though, one thing comes to mind... You and I, despite our different conclusions and the way we choose to act, are clearly similar in how we think(according to your description, at least). I can't vouch for reaching your degree of analysis, but I'm relatively sure we're in the same direction, at least. What I wonder is how similar or different this mindset is from 'most people,' or aspies in general, and how applicable this idea is outside of our personalities and thinking styles? My tendency is to jump to an optimistic conclusion, for the sake of garnering positive potential, despite realism, but it's possible that this one's a little far out...
... Or not? Not sure what to think.

Thank you, I wanted to be about some kind of way forward rather than "deal with it" sort to thing.



It is not perfect but you do get better at it over time, you can get into a roll at times. You can step it up when you know you are in a destructive period, be more persistent than usual. You get a higher frequency of intervention because you don't let things slide.


I will talk about that in more detail later The wall may be more where some people are at especially if that have bad learnt behaviours like social phobia, general anxiety, panic disorder, etc. People with ASD often have a combination of learnt and inherent problems, you become better at deducing the two with experience.

The distraction and interruption techniques mentioned above are actually extremely versatile. That is because they rely on very little to work. The more traditional CBT methods require that you know the nature of you problem, and you will take fundamental beliefs (assuming you have be able to put them to words) and directly challenge them. In that context the traditional CBT can work really well. With distraction and Interruption don't need to know that nature of the problem, don't require the thoughts or feelings to be in a specific form, none of that matters.

What I think can work well is to have the the distraction and interruption as something immediately to hand even though you won't necessary be brilliant at it yet, then you can establish what you need for classical deductive CBT, then one you have made some progress and have become a lot more conscientious about things, you may want to revert to the distraction and interruption because it can be a quicker to nip things in the bud, and frankly if you are over analytical arguing with yourself can be problematic in itself.




I think the principles are definitely applicable to many people, dispute a vast array of different thinking styles. It always has to be catered to the individual anyway, otherwise it wouldn't work. The main gap is giving enough awareness so they would be able to benefit.

You do what I would recommend to protect you mental health better, but what can I say I'm a stickler for punishment it is just me, I can't shut the analysis off, but I can stifle it. I like investigating these things, I accept the consequences of my actions. I do know from previous experience (breakdown 2004), what the serious warning signs are, so I am conscientious about that and will take immediate action when that level of stress is nearing. I don't voluntarily get anything like that close to the brink, because no one wants to feel that way anyway. I just take a some liberties to satisfy my curiosity.

Just what I needed to read! At present i'm fairly emotionally disturbed on account of various things that are outside of my control, and have this very evening come to the realization that I need essentially to do what you say. It reminds me of one of my favourite quotes, the epigraph from Tristram Shandy: it's not the things themselves but our opinions of the things themselves that torment us. If only I could constantly bear this in mind! It is very hard not to let things fester though: what are these other wall-breaking techniques?
Also, incidentally,

What's the source for this?

Interesting! I like it.

I'll have to retract that I’m afraid. I hate it when I can't find something I know I've seen. Problem is I read these studies on syndicates, which get wiped of the media sites in no time. I've searched everywhere, journals, etc. As I can't remember the exact terminology used it is tough to find. I use a lot of lateral thinking to find things and can be successfully that way, but not now. As I have little sense of time so it could have been three years ago that I saw it.

Actually that study was about social appraisal. There are much older studies about self-appraisal in general and relate to the illusion of control. Such as Alloy & Abramason, 1979
http://tinyurl.com/The-Psychology-of-learning
http://tinyurl.com/Frontiers-of-cognitive
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_control

http://www-staff.psychiatry.cam.ac.uk/~ ... k11-04.htm


What these suggest is being somewhat depressed can give you a more accurate perseption of you abilities, and social impression. However being severely depressed still leads a very distorted view as does over inflated ego.

My hunch is that having a slightly better impression of you abilities, and social impression that the reality isn't a bad thing. It can serve as a motor to achievement, and also directly it may actually improve your performance short term.

Good example: Say my martial arts moves are typically around 80% accurate. I might believe that my moves aren't accurate, this would lead me to fumble my moves, due to being too conscious of them, rather than relying on ingrained movement, which I have built up from experience. I would be thinking about the moves in exclusion of the task, and getting stuck in my head. Conversely, I can believe moves are pretty accurate most of the time and leave it at that. This could lead me to execute the moves 5% more accurately. I am able to look at my training partner rather than my hands, my posture is better as a result, and I can execute moves that are more accurately, because I am reacting to what is going on rather than worrying about the accuracy of my moves.

However the flip side is, if your ego is too inflated you can loose touch with reality as you are not grounded. People who have too much false confidence in martial arts, are going to get hurt. They way I use positive appraisal is built on some experience, and especially experience of how different forms of positive appraisal influence my performance.

Long over due, was put off because writing about such 'involved' topic can be a bit of a head f**k with executive dysfunction. But I'm a stickler for punishment, so as promised I will talk about the 'wall analogy' now, as succinctly as possible:

If you have a big problem, you therefore have a big objective of getting over that big problem, you have an end goal so to speak. There a positives and negatives of having and end goal. The positive is the direction and objective, the negatives is the preconceived notion of the future, which might not match up to exceptions when you get there and also the main mistake which is trying to knock the wall down all at once and failing and then believing it to be hopeless.

So the wall is you problem it is so long you cannot get round it, it is so tall you cannot climb over it, so thick and strong you cannot push it over. So how on earth are you going to tackle this? Well what you are going to do is focus on the bricks and joins. that is breaking down your problem into suitable smaller steps. That means objective that are realistic and related to where you are now, but can be quite lateral issue if you like so long as it helps with the self improvement. So you chip away at a brick and sooner or latter you removing that brick and it becomes a bit easer to remove the bricks beside it, and you start removing a bunch of them. Of course I this wall goes right round the globe, so would never remove all, but then again you wouldn't you need to you are just trying the get the other side and have already begun to reassess what might be there when you get there. Over time you are making headways you have removed enough bricks to make the wall structurally unstable, which is a tiny, tiny fraction of the total number of bricks in the wall. So one day you are pulling out a brick and the wall starts to sway above you, you run for cover as you give it one last tug, and that section of the wall collapses before your very eyes. After composing yourself you clamber over the debris to the other side....

This is the essence of how CBT works with big seeming impossible problems. The distraction and disruption is good for random, and everyday anxieties, and also maintaining what you have achieve, so they can complement each other. I haven't given you every or any practical CBT, techniques I would read up on that yourself, and once you have go the general principles (which isn't rocket science) you will be coming up with new ideas for yourself.

Ok that went smoother than expected, so onwards and upwards...

-> perspectives that allow you stay vigilant, and know when to act.

Basically any cycle of behaviour that has gone round more than once it is in danger of becoming engrained. Early intervention is always better than letting it fester. If it is something that is disruptive to your life is going to cause you to be unhappy then act to disrupt it. It may seem smaller time, but why allow a negative belief or undesirable behaviour to grow into something bigger? Experience is all I can say as to the detection rate, you have to start somewhere. So yes it is usually earlier than one might think. later equals more work to undo.

So either you are disrupting and nipping in the bud, or you are breaking down walls.

And no I don't always follow my own advice, but any action to this effect is going to help overall well-being.

Ok the final topic "going against the grain". I have quite a bit to say about this, so following the theme of breaking thing into bite sized pieces I will just define what I mean by it then later explain my views in more detail, maybe if people want to ask questions first.

So there are two types of grain to go against, or two types of tides to swim against if you prefer. They are not at all mutually exclusive either.

First one is the hurdles in your life that are causing you problems, and may just as well cause other people problems if they were in the same situation. The second one and most controversial is opposition to things that you do that are personal to you that maybe aren't so conventional. This is something I feel passionate about, and may directly contradict some of the advice on this forum. However intern of happiness I believe it to be non-negotiable. It is not about anti-compromise or being defiant for defiant's sake or some sort of image thing. It is only a personal thing, and you may only include a handful of things that you really stick to you guns on, and thins even included situation where comparatively you are missing out on things generally valued. This is about well-being, rather than towing the line expecting to find happiness in conformity. It also can't be a a barrier to a necessary step to where you want to, so you can't be doing it purely based on fear.

So “going against” means you stick it out, you get knocked down you pick yourself op. it can be quite difficult, it is ok to take breaks, but don’t give up altogether. Some people are born resilient, but you can force yourself to adopt this mentality. They eventual rewards are really worth it, take it from me.

Wow. I have a lot to say on this. I just hope I don't get too long winded with the reply. Mainly though - I think I may have had a bit more success in the past few years at cracking the code on some of these internal 'grappling with self and subconscious' sorts of riddles.

While its true that I can't reach into other people's mind and know what they can and can't help, I do know that a great many NT's and aspies both (a sizeable majority) have the knack for basing their reasoning in logical analysis of reality and this sculpts their emotional reactions rather than their emotions being the dominant reality.

When you have made that shift in mentality (it can happen at different ages for different people) you realize that emotion is purely a vapor. If it throws a lot of fog up at you and clouds your judgment you can force it to calm enough for you to think things through and, half the time, the thoughts that will run through your head in that process will further dissipate that emotion. People vary in their skill at doing this, reshaping their thoughts on things, reshaping their 'meta tags' on things and events, some can go the full course while others have specific hang ups that they either set their bad at or - in the case of aggression - simply don't want to castrate impulsive anger and what social leverage that gives them. People who continue to think and live purely emotionally though, I have noticed a defining traits with many of them - there's no such thing as constructive criticism or you sticking up for yourself when your right, any criticism or straight-talk against their wants is confrontation, confrontation is emotional rather than logical, and the emotion tells them that confrontation needs to have aggression met with aggression.



What I've learned about confidence is that its definitely NOT all in your head. Even if you've gotten great at manipulating your own thoughts, your chemistry has a lot to do with it, as does your realistic resources - resources such as your ability to process certain things in that given situation, your expertise or lack thereof, in social situations it also extends to what you physically look like, who you tend to physically look like you should be to other people, and how often other people try to clamp a 'place' down over you and perhaps even try to correct your sense of self for the worse via that disagreement.

When I think of it in a physical sense I can give myself as an example here. I feel like I have come to a pretty good grip on life's angles, perhaps past most people. Unfortunately in terms of day to day use though - I'm the type of aspie guy who looks like a child on a Hallmark card (well, except for the balding). My neurology is very shaky, weak, my chemistry screams victim, mark, etc. etc.. That coupled with my AS gave me no shovel to dig myself out of that perception from others and if anything deepened it with even more added negativity, hence the world around me has always given me a very bi-polar sort of read and with no causal link to my behavior, usually more causal link simply to my appearance. I've had times in my life where I felt confident and had someone tell me looked scared. The social anxiety over these things comes and goes, I'm able to shove it off, but, it becomes apparent to me that I'm built the way I'm built. I can get my bench press up to 300 lbs, I can have a black belt in Kali and even stay in for another four years until my red belt techniques are hammered in, I'll still look as virile as Toby McGwire in his early days - no doubt I'll be able to kick a heck of a lot of arse but - my reality will only shift so much as I don't have someone dying to get out of me that I don't already speak. Based on that there are certain fixed parameters, those that my mind has little or no control over. If I am able to shake the frail or nervous sensation of my body in the genetic/neurological sense - I may have another gradient of success but, it'll still go a little ways and stop with my brain being wired for deep analytical thought and very little social panning where as it seems most people are built the opposite. I'll feel perhaps very confident in certain situations where I have expertise and can command people's respect, in the social game however though I'll likely always be mediocre at best.

Overall though my hard earned lessen is that you can't trick yourself into confidence, especially when you've had a hard past or have the kind of mind your describing - ie. analyzes through emotion for a clearer picture of reality, this is because your subconscious mind is the one member of your life that you simply can't BS, it won't stand for it and it'll repel anything rosy that you try to throw at it.



On one hand I'd agree that there is a lot of delusion involved, although you notice the difference between those who can and can't carry sweeping delusions. One can be under the delusion that most people like them or that they're a joy to be around when they aren't, society rolls its eyes a little but doesn't run intervention like it would for - say - someone who has a perceptually correct but adverse awareness.

Like you said though its a double-edged sword, as in you make yourself vulnerable to really getting slammed by overrating your skills in certain areas but at the same time, as long as its not a big liability to the safety or sense of justice for others, it can actually draw on something like the law of attraction and bring things about. My challenge has been this; I had an incredibly bleak image of reality for a long time, one that I thought was extremely accurate, unfortunately I caught seemingly no breaks whatsoever. On the other hand though, more recently, I have actually cued in on something - what I think to be a big enough existential truth to overturn my underlying assumptions - and it may well turn things around.

So we're stuck in this sense not only wondering what our outward sense of things does in regard to our visible positive energy or lack thereof, but, whether our minds actually have much more control over what we've thought of as 'material reality' than we'd previously considered. While I wouldn't quite call matter vaporous on its quantum properties (for practical intent and purposes I'm not going to start sinking through mezzanine flooring because I think I will) I am coming to the conclusion that - if reality were purely material, ie. no God, no 'supernatural' structure (IMO there's no such thing as the supernatural - its really a pejorative since something either exists or it doesn't), nothing seems to behave the way it should. I'd go as far to say that matter may have some express control mechanisms in place for interaction from the energy of thought and the energy of words - which doesn't necessarily involve a human or animal ear on the other side.

There's more but I'll try not to bog the love and dating thread down with philosophy and religion topics. I am in a sense suggesting though that people with chronic depression or anxiety, perhaps have an extremely accurate picture of day to day reality but that depression comes from missing a very critical piece of the puzzle.


You can effectively dip other people in your mental state long enough to win them over into agreement. If someone is delusionally happy or confident though that seems to be something that other people like and want - happiness and confidence are contagious as emotions and they're emotions people like to feel. Rather than raining on the other person's parade they'll take it for its own benefit. Pessimism on the other hand, while also contageous, sends people running because its too easy to possess (whereas happiness is a more challenging endeavor - delusionally or sanely).


The thing that seems to be built right through us that I don't think we'll ever be able to separate ourselves from is our animal core. It causes most of our problems, in looking at whatever sins have been mentioned in the bible they're all derivative of things that having that animal nature puts us through and causes us to want to take in hard times. On the other hand though, we have a lot of room to pivot, we can't take ourselves off of the axis that we were built on although we can have other sets of thought that put the animal practically on mute (it seems like the animal does have a volume lever on it and you can set it wherever dB you want with enough effort), there are other thought sets that can overpower the animal. I do find it amazing though that certain animalistic behavior is simply taken as standard for humanity these days but I can also say that this may point to exactly what's not getting through people's heads, what they're missing about reality. etc. etc., and when its that many people it tends to mean that the public sphere and pop culture are lacking a pivotal ingredient, maybe several.


Even four or five months ago - I had plenty of times where, with a thought or two, I could set myself off into heart palpitations, cold sweat or hot sweat, feel shaky, dysphoric, its amazing what thoughts can do. The sad thing is, you can cut that thought out and spend *hours* trying to talk your nervous system back down. Knowing that I've done everything I can to cut out that sort of thinking, because when you think of that as well as what effects it even has on your viability as a male to find a female, to make a family, to ever even be loved by the right person - the economics become crystal clear.


In that position I would do this - deal directly with that thought tell yourself why its BS, be your own voice of reassurance. You can convince yourself to change state though I really would not recommend anything like pretending that you have a huge red stop sign, hearing the word STOP, smelling fresh red paint - for me the macho approach of trying to stop or replace a thought just made things worse, ie. some subconscious part of my mind - rather than having the thought weaken - actually would make it keep bouncing back stronger every time I did that. I'd just say "Its only life - even if that happened...what...I'd freeze up for a second stunned, it would *suck*.....and then I'd realize... I'm still breathing...check my pulse - yep, its still going....ok, since I'm still alive what now? A sandwich? A beer? some Call of Duty?". We have a knack, as aspies, for over-magnifying consequences or how harsh our realities are - especially after what's been done to us most of our lives. That's a problem that we need to short circuit as best we can.


I don't think you'll ever be able to effectively 'delude' yourself - I know that I can't, my subconscious is like the mafioso or iron lady, simply won't stand for it. What you do have that you can work with by engaging reality full on is that you have many different thoughts and ideas, many different aspects of truth, that you have rolling around most of the day in something like an alphabet soup. The saliency and order of importance for these thoughts has everything to do with where you'll be left off at - whether its an optimistic or pessimistic place. If you can't find optimism through what you know; start reaching out for more information and more forms, structures, and filters to add to your sense of 'truth'. Our internal senses of things are very mathematical and, if you can find something axiomatic that completely changes/rearranges the game - you have quite a viable answer so long as it can hold up to your own tests and metrics of reasoning.


What I get with martial arts is, even if I'm extremely good at them, I'm still gentle on so many levels. People with real vitriol are going to fight much better than I can with the same amount of knowledge, hence I'd need to be in for a long time, with a black belt, to simply out maneuver them. It shite though to chemically feel about as sturdy as a paper plate no matter what I do for myself. That's one thing that I know is purely hormonal. Some people feel like they're made of steel, I've known on a couple occasions what it was like to feel like as diesel as some of the ultra-virile guys I've known although I have to admit that I felt that on LSD and that without it, my brain chemistry simply can't do that. Just like we have a friend who's kind of his own sort, kind of weird, but ultra-confident, feels invincible, feels superior, even though he looks like Finch from American Pie. He has the martial arts to back it up now, makes all kinds of eccentric social mistakes though (may or may not be aspie though), and after feeling invincible for years but having what he called crippling depression he got on an an antidepression med and now feels extremely vulnerable, something he's never felt in his life nor understood in others.

I guess you just have to take it that there's a huge array of variables. Relative happiness, confidence, etc. seems like its a sum of how almost everything about you shakes out and - especially for people who fully deserve on their own merits to be confident or optimistic but for whatever reason can't be, you owe it to yourself all the more to find the means just because your worth it.

Compared to? previous years another person?

I actually agree with the idea that people can have an emotional response based on a logical process. In fact that is exactly what I was saying that in some instances this can be a problem See, just because there is a logical process going on doesn’t mean that it is purely objective and not subjective. Of course people are going to use some level of logical approach, which in line with their intellectual capabilities.

Just because there has been a logical process doesn't mean it is serving their interest either. It is the people that profess to be most logical that aren't as logical as they think they are, because they fail to see their local as a fallible tool and there is a common misconception that because you form the "right" conclusion quicker that means you are more logical, when being logical can actually be quite time consuming because there are always more deduction to be made. The emotional side of the brain does play a part in regulating that.
http://changingminds.org/explanations/e ... cision.htm

As to what is the dominant reality, that is somewhat of a subjective assertion to qualify. I can say it is a fruitless exercise to be absolutely logical with everything, simply due to the fact the brain cannot process that amount to information if it tried, you always have to be selective what you are analysing, and simultaneous process to a lesser of greater extent have to be able accommodate the overall effort. Many process in the brain are automated and suck task do not figure in you “individual” sense of self abstraction level.

How many people you know is able to perfectly separate logic serving their own interests from inherent animistic (and group intelligence) motivated behaviour? It is pretty much impossible. Many of the things that are “illogical” on an individual level make a whole different kind of sense from a purely animalistic or group intelligence point of view. So logic is a tool, it is not an absolute path to the truth.

I also don’t want this to be about NT or ASD with regard to one being model on one side of my argument and the converse. Actually you are right about some people being inherently confident or inherently resilient and having a predisposition that hey are born with. They don’t need to listen to this advice, this is for people like myself with includes people on and of the spectrum, as strategy forward. Chemistry I agree with again, however there is a psychosomatic impact which is open to influence. Actually my cousin is a neuroscientist who has done research into perception and how it is possible to change the brain function by certain types of “meditation” (and not so much others):
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 060205.php
http://visionlab.harvard.edu/Members/Olivia/olivia.html

Compared to both when I was twenty seven and, from a point of reference to the current thread I feel like I had the same questions - may have had different answers, but it seems like we're on similar time frames.


Yeah, its a mix of logic and intuition. Logic covers what you have enough puzzle pieces to form a clearer portrait of, intuition covers you where you clearly won't have enough puzzle pieces and are left on doing the best you can to clarify your own impression and see what scheme of 'connect the dots' seems to give the most lucid image.


I'd say its more than that - someone who'd claim that in an 'I'm better than you' way has an obvious lack of maturity and immense blind spots (ie. they think they know everything because of how little they know).


Sphere of influence is a big part of it but I think one can generally be more logical, though I don't call it speed of processing but rather the person who's more wisdom/ big picture accuracy oriented. A person can be wise enough to try in that direction though its not always a guarantee that they'll succeed.


Yep, we're far from being at the 'end of history' or the 'end of science'. Intuition is the filler and people are left again to do their best with filling in the gaps based on the kinds of evidence they're able to find in either their environment (usually the first and best source) followed by book learning, expanding their understanding of other spheres of influences, travel, etc.. Some people will have more luxuries in this area of course more than others, it all depends on what a person's life has lined up for them.


This sounds like a symantic debate over what 'logic' means. It could be perfectly logical for someone who's a braniac and who wants to invent and stay out of harms way to stay in a library and not subject himself to physical harm. For a guy who wants to date attractive women it could be perfectly logical for him to play the evolutionary games like get a crotch rocket and take it up to 180 mph on the highway on a regular basis, make a big name for himself as a daredevil, if that's the only way he can make a name for himself. Wants and needs seem to be at the core of everything - then the question of 'what's logical?' really relates back to 'what's logical in me fulfilling my wants and needs?'. Yes, there are things in ultimate reality that one will want to check their desires against - to see if something bigger supercedes the value of the more evolutionary need, but in general our desires and how they meet reality are what shape human beings (as well as their life experiences and how environment has influenced them, elevated, humbled, etc.).


This is where I think AS and NT does come into it. You do have nimbish NT's as well, they just don't seem to threaten the order as much, they stay in their place and people tend to bother them less. With AS and having very atypical weaknesses and strengths, the strengths make us a school or work political problem as well as very cartoony in other senses - we heighten other people's awareness of us more than say a fragile/shy/meek NT would for that reason.


But in terms of manlyness - turning...lets say David Spade into Densel's character from Training Day - won't happen, can't happen. He's quite literally not built for it and he'd never in his life be able to both gain the resources and eject enough of himself, let alone look the right way. When it comes to relationships though, whether its how women look at a guy (especially that - our looks mean less than our social domination capacities) or how guys size up another guy as a man, as a puff, as a mark, etc., its mostly things you can't help. I know guys who haven't worked out a day in their lives who are over 6 foot, close to 280 lbs, and can outlift me any day of the week, perhaps even by double, and I've been working out for two years. The genetics of being able to just have that mean something, the reality of society realizing you have that also means a lot regarding you'll see yourself, how you'll work things out. Yes, the Dany DeVito's of the world have their own things they can rely on but, again, you need to have one inherent gift to compensate for the lack of another. We have some elasticity in terms of what we can change about ourselves but, its only so significant.

wtf?

that is extraordinary naive to assume you were on the same wavelength at the same age, and within the next couple of years it will pan out the same I will draw the same conclusions as you, and that they would have never crossed my mind before...presumably.

Just to clarify, I don't believe you should try to use this to try and be something you are not. Just like martial art it is not going to make anyone into bruce lee, but the point is to make some sort of improvement from how you would otherwise be.

Lol, I wouldn't have said it if I knew it would be received as a hard assertion. This thread relates to reality not stacking in your favor and the course of action to be taken when you realize that the more realistic you in a material sense the more of a problem it becomes in other ways - whether anxiety, depression, or effects on how other people see you? That's something I was grappling with a lot in the last few years, technically it goes back even farther, but, at this point I think I'm finding closure with it. That's really all I meant.

Ok right, well that is a simplification. I actually was talking about how people use suspending disbelief as a device. i didn't say to copy their example necessarily, as that would be hard to achieve the same result if it was put on without the capacity to do it. I merely mention how emotions can be subjective (which i understand we agree on?), and that knowledge itself can be used to break out of negative thinking. Even in the case of non situational "chemical depression", although not such a walk in the park.

My appraisal of your comment does not make me feel bad, I just could not get my head round the older equal wiser implication, I don't by into that certainly not at those margins.