It Doesn't Make Sense...

Post Reply New Topic

Some people receive an official diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome from a trained mental-health professional, and then doubt that the diagnosis is valid.

Other people diagnose themselves, without any formal training in mental-health issues, and then adamantly refuse to consider that their diagnosis might be flawed.

Should "Chronically contentious", "Disagrees with others", or "Argumentative" be included in the DSM description of Asperger's Syndrome symptoms?

I think the criteria should be "Never listens to others and accepts no external babblablababble, like human teflon".

Argumentative describes me.

Is the "self" in this condition so centered that it influences this bias, as to ignore things outside of oneself?

Is it hard for something outside, such as an opinion, to be taken, because it it did not originate from the inside?

Is the outside felt to such a less degree that is seems inconsequential?

If this is true like "Teflon," what would you hypothesize as to why?

I resemble both remarks. I have been formally DXd with a couple of AS comorbids. But I've been told that I cannot have AS only because I give good eye contact. Apparently, that is the only real criteria for my health care provider to use to access whether one has it or not. I have a boat load of other symptoms but they were all thrown out. She said something about childhood abuse as the main cause of all my issues. Um yeah...

May I suggest one other possibility that there are some healthcare providers who refuse to DX adults with AS, even when the shoe fits.

I try not to be argumentative, I just have issues not correcting people when they're (factually) wrong...

Of course I'm one of those who actually got a official diagnosis and hasn't doubted it at all.

No, this is pretty widespread in human beings as a whole, and also applies to religion, politics, urban myths, medical quackery, conspiracy theories...

(1)The self will take heed of things that make sense, regardless of whether they originate from the inside or the outside. Most of the things that originate from the outside make no sense, because they originate from minds so different from one's own mind that the incomings of those minds make no sense to oneself. The most easily accepted external information is factual information about which there is no debate. If there is debate, then the evidence will have to analyzed to determine the answer for oneself, an answer that is subject to change should new evidence modify it.

(2) Same answer as (1), unless the opinion is backed up by many facts in a make-sensical manner.

(3) Same answer as (1), and indeed the outside is not strongly felt, e.g. not feeling the peer pressure that others feel so strongly as to conform at the expense of their self-expression.

(4) Same answer as (1), maybe because emotional arousal induced by the outside is diminished.

Aspies just need things to make sense.
Revision: I just need things to make sense. Once it makes sense, I will accept it, until new evidence demands that I modify my understanding. The understanding is modified according to the evidence. The evidence is not changed to fit the understanding.

I forgot what this thread was about already.

3 & 4 seem to be intrinsic to INTJ , but maybe most of the "introverts." Heck, this all seems to be within the norm, and as per thread title. I'm skeptical with anything that is not proved. Many people do not critically analyze, and throw in their lot with the majority by default, or chance an erroneous conclusion due to lack of consequences-- they get bailed out of it by someone.

The only 'autistic thing' in all this is perhaps the understanding of the language that incomes, or "communications," it would seem.

No, because you said some people. So it can't apply to everyone.

It does not! Make! Sense!



*cough*

Sorry.

I have always found INTJs as hard to understand as any other personality type. They still attach far more social and emotional meaning to their outgoings and the incomings of others than I do. They are not nearly as cut-off as I am.

Good point. But then, not every symptom of AS currently in the DSM must be present for a diagnosis to be rendered.

No, but you need several of the core traits. And I don't see this becoming a core trait anytime soon.

Some aspies like jam, others eschew it. Should we make one or both of those a symtpom of asperger's,

LOL! Sure, why not?

I remember one part in Tony Attwood's book about parents of Aspie children finding themselves entrapped in neverending arguments with the children. This was so true for me. I used to argue with my father all the time, and back in the pre-Internet '80s, we had to go to the library very very very frequently to check and see who had the facts right.

Edit: My father might be on the spectrum too. I don't know why we were constantly arguing about the exact lengths of rivers and the exact heights of mountains.