Aspartners: Questions

Post Reply New Topic

Yes, that's a part of it.

Another part is trying to understand certain inconsistent standards like "Be true to yourself and Be yourself." These phrases are so freaking confusing to me. Does one have to pretend to be something he is not in order to succeed in America? By this logic, Jack McCellan, a self-confessed pedophile, should be allowed to be himself. http://www.newgon.com/wiki/Jack_McClellan League_Girl has a child and so do you. If being a pedophile is a sexual orientation should this man be allowed to molest either of your children. Personally, I think not. Be yourself is contradictory to morality. Should nambla (North American man/boy association) be allowed to be themselves? They're asking for acceptance from society like we are. It's very confusing to me.

Another thing that is so confusing to me is our inalienable rights. By the very definition of inalienable if there are exceptions like the typhoid Mary case then how are they truthfully inalienable? Based upon the first formulation of Kantian ethics a maxim should hold up in all iterations or across the whole board. Based upon Kantian ethics are rights are not inalienable.

Another thing is there are people in poverty who desperately need help. In fact, there are a lot of autistics who desperately need help to function in society. There are a whole lot of right wing conservatives who believe no one is owed anything because it the government is used to force to work for someone else and give up their property to someone else by force. By this reasoning, the taxpayers are forced to pay the police to protect others, they're forced to pay for the fire department to put out fires and we're all forced to pay to educate someone else's children other than our own. Based upon Kantian ethics the police and fire departments should be dismantled and we all should pay for our own police and fire protection. This did not work with the Chicago Fire. Education should be dismantled as well. This makes no sense. Some things have to be ran by the government and be in the commons. The Great Chicago Fire proved this.

Another thing, one's attitude is treated as though it is the building blocks of time and space. I have some of the same objections he has. http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/Attitude_Fanatics.htm

Attitude and Confidence are emotional states that are byproducts of a person's experiences. Confidence and attitude is not something that is a muscle that can be moved. Like Winston Wu is saying, the way Americans take it makes no sense.

How are we responsible for our own lives if we are interrelated to our physical and social environment and events outside of ourselves can influence what choices we have? How does this internal locus of control that Americans believe hold up in a logical manner. How is it true that we always control our own destiny? There is some truth to this but why doesn't external locus of control have some validity as well? What is the logical and/or philosophical basis for this?

These are some of the questions that I wanted to ask the Aspartners as well.

This is a really interesting and tough question for me. At one level, I could answer this as a pragmatic decision - despite all evidence to the contrary, I choose to believe that I am in control of my own destiny. The reason I do this is because that belief will help me achieve meaningful goals and improve the quality of my life. At the same time, I acknowledge that the on a certain level, the belief is completely false, because as you point out, I have very little control over anything. So that approach requires holding two contradictory notions to be true simultaneously for purely pragmatic reasons...I know, an Aspie's worst nightmare.

So let me try to approach this in a way that synthesizes the two concepts. Sharing your mechanistic understanding of the universe, I agree that I have no control over my initial biology, nor my childhood environment, essentially all the things that went into making me the kind of decision making machine that I am today. All my basic programming was created by other sources. But here I am, a decision maker, tasked with making decisions which will directly affect my well-being. I also am unique in the world in that I value my own-well being very highly, and understand more than anyone else what will benefit me. While my ability to influence my world may be minimal, I am more able to benefit myself, due to my unique perspective and motivations, than anyone else. So while I can accept that my influence is minimal, I also understand that with respect to myself and my well-being, it is the most beneficent source of influence around, and as I value my well-being, I would do best to exercise that influence to the fullest of my ability, as if it were the sole/main source of influence (even if it isn't).

In terms of responsibility - I suppose that's a moral question, but it comes down to relative power. As I pointed out above, having a greater interest in, and understanding of my needs makes me better suited than anyone else to take responsibility for them. So, if anyone is going to have responsibility for my well-being, it should be me. I suppose you could divide it into shares, in which case, I may give my wife 15%, my family 10%, my boss 5% and me 70% of the responsibility. Ultimately though, I get to take the blame if my life is unsatisfactory because I'm the one who can (and should want to) do something about it. I do think this changes over time - for example parents are primarily responsible for the well-being of their children (when they are young) because at that age parents have a better understanding of what will benefit the child, just as much motivation to provide it, and much more power than the child to do so, not to mention the fact that they made the child.

I know you focus on that particular phrase a lot. It is a maxim, and maxims are not meant to be taken quite that literally or extremely. I know that is annoying but everything has exceptions and modifications. Not every maxim is believed in by everyone,nor does it apply to everyone universally, either.

"Be yourself," does not mean that you never have to fake anything. I also think it is meant for those who conform too much, and does not even apply to most aspies. most of the time. For us, it means do not look like you are faking it. Try to look natural. For those who are good (too good, maybe) at conforming, it is meant to remind them not to lose their own nature in their conformity. This is generally not our issue. We are told to fit in, and yes, sadly, fitting in to some degree is required to function in any society. Each society has different norms. Other countries/societies have their own norms, but fitting in is required by any society I can think of.

It also (especially) does not apply to pedophiles or anyone that is considered a deviant. They are not supposed to be themselves. Anyone society does not approve of is not encouraged to be themselves.

You have to take any of these saying with "a grain of salt." If you take them literally or to an extreme, you know you are not interpreting it correctly. This is not how NTs think. The exceptions are supposed to be implied, sometimes.



There is no such thing as a right that someone with power and means cannot take away from you, or force you to exchange, in part or in whole. "Inalienable" is meant to mean that something is considered by the speaker/writer to be an important, fundamental right. In law, these rights are interpreted, and applied according to how the judge thinks they ought to be, based on his own prejudices/biases and his/her notion of the law and precedent. Rights tend to overlap with one another, anyway, and one person's right to do x, often conflicts with another's ability to do y.



Right now, there is a particular political zeitgeist, but there are always people around who resent the notion of paying for certain public goods or things that help others. The verbiage is especially vicious now, maybe b/c of general Internet access to where everyone has Internet access and can share their opinions with no social consequences. I would rather that, than if they make the Internet less free, so the courseness in public discourse is a cost of this. People have their own individual political and economic views and most won't be persuaded by the other side mist of the time.



Yes, this is another thing people have to fake. People want to be associated with success. Attitude is associated with success. Most self-doubts are supposed to be hidden from people with whom you only deal professionally, or are not close to. Just like you would hide any personal and excessively strong emotion. There are things you have to keep to yourself in a public sphere.



The focus is on personal responsibility b/c this is a value that is emphasized in our society. It is the flip side of being more tolerant of individualism than in some other cultures. In practice, every society requires some personal responsibility and expects some conformity. It is the quantities and types that are different.

A society where people all decided not to do anything because they truly have no agency, or to do whatever they wanted b/c it is pre-destined or otherwise not under their control would pragmatically be impossible to run. Even the Puritans who believed everything was pre-ordained and predestined by their notion of a deity, punished people for their actions, when they broke rules.



Yeah...they are not the philosophical type over there.... They are there for primarily one reason...griping about aspies. I don't see getting insight on NT ways of thinking over there. They are not interested in dixcussing larger questions.

Wow ASDMommy, you answered that personal responsibility question way better and quicker than me!

Regarding "be yourself" I just wanted to add something: Us NTs can usually get a sense of what others like and want, and it's possible to pretend to be that. On the most simple level it could mean going out of your way to open the car door for a girl on your first date, even if you never do that. It could also mean pretending to like things that you don't like, all in service of making the date go smoother. People discourage this because focusing too much on managing others' impressions has the side effect of making people very nervous. Rather than being present in the moment, they wind up thinking thoughts like "What should I say so I don't sound so stupid?" So basically this advice is intended to help people calm down.

A more important benefit to this advice is that while it is possible for people to pretend to be the ideal mate for someone else, it is not possible to sustain this illusion indefinitely. Eventually you have a bad day and don't put in the effort, and all of a sudden the partner is shocked to see a side of you they never knew existed. Pretending too much will land people in incompatible relationships. I'd much rather be rejected because someone doesn't like me, then feel like I have to hide aspects of myself from my partner.

There are gray areas here - people do try to control certain undesirable traits and make them slightly less pronounced. This lets the potential partner slowly get used to those things, rather than being immediately turned off by them. So, for example, I tend to eat food very fast., I may want to intentionally slow down a bit on the first few dates. I may try to pay more attention to my hygiene and appearance before a date than I normally would. The goal here is just to queue up the impressions that the person will make of me. Before the person notices what a fast eater I am, they will have had time to get a sense of my personality, my intellect and my humor. That way, they won't just summarily reject me for one negative thing, without having seen all my positive traits. This mild impression management is generally a good idea in any sort of relationship. As a real example; my wife and I fart in front of each other all the time with no concern. After being married for years, this is completely natural. The other person usually says "ewww" and jokes about it, but it is not a big deal. On the first date, if I had to fart, I probably would have tried to go to the bathroom to do it and I'm sure she would have too. If she hadn't, then one of the 3 or 4 things I remembered about her after the first date would be that she farts in front of others without concern, which may have colored my judgment of her at that time.

So the end result is occasional minor lies are ok but major lies are a bad idea, as is focusing too much attention on impression management (so that it makes you nervous and pulls you out of the moment).

Wow, both of you wrote some good stuff. Would both of you be willing to read what I have written on my blog and tell me what you think. If my thinking is fallacious anywhere will you two please show me?

http://whyifailedinamerica.wordpress.com/

Warning some of it is long and verbose.

Cubedemon:

I will post my response after I have a chance to read it again, and think about it a bit.

Edited to add:

Initial thoughts:

I think the focus on American culture is just a little off. Here is why: American culture is not the only culture that prioritizes wealth. American celebrate wealth in its own way, and yes, does spread those particular ways through its culture, but wealth is intrinsically a marker for status and that is true elsewhere. Some places like China and Russia have sublimated this marker temporarily (while simultaneously using it in different ways) but they have re-emerged their as well. China in particular has always valued wealth and prosperity very openly before it became a Communist country, quietly after, and quite openly again post market reforms. America is not unique in this.

In addition, I don't think American culture is uniquely bad for aspies. America does have a particular ideological bent towards economic self-sufficiency, and so our government does not have the safety net that others have. That said, a lot of cultures that either have a governmental or family safety net, are not very open to non-conformity (some even less so than here) and have a lot of obligations of the individual to the family or society that aspies would have trouble satisfying and making them low status for that reason, as well. Counties without resources also will prioritize taking care of "healthy" "productive" members over those they see as not being healthy or productive. Places that have superstitions regarding odd people would be even worse, though in different ways.

I think it is hard to be an Aspie anywhere. I think some cultures are more tolerant of quirks than ours and have a better safety net, but I think a lot of your critiques apply to societies as a whole.

Last edited by ASDMommyASDKid on 27 Jan 2014, 6:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

neat blog cubedemon, lots of philosophy mixed with politics, I scanned a bit, will take a closer read sometime soon.

Everything you say may be true. I have visited other countries for brief periods for vacation with my wife but I have never lived amongst other societies outside of America. I can only claim experience living in America so I can only write about my experiences. I can't claim anything about other societies if I have not lived amongst them. For me, I know nothing about them except for what I read which is colored through American eyes because I was born and bred in America.

This being said I can only go by what I read and I don't know what other societies promote or not. America promotes itself as a diverse nation where varieties of thought, dress, etc when it really is not. America is opposite of what it actually promotes. This is inconsistent and by Orwell's standards it is called Double-think. One is forced to be double-minded.

It isn't just about Aspergers you have to factor in personality type as well. Aspies have different personalities like NTs. I don't know how accurate this statistic is but it says that around 88% of those on the spectrum can't get or keep jobs. I don't know what was used to come up with this statistic and what variables were used. I bet personality is a big factor and those who did the stats don't even realize it. Personality is very complex more than what the myers briggs can test for but I will use the types from this test.

I bet the more SJ type personality types have a higher likelihood of success than other types especially the ISTJ types. http://www.16personalities.com/istj-personality

There is one man who has aspergers on here who was and is able to succeed. His ISTJ personality traits enable him to do so.

This is my personality type and why I have a difficult time fitting into society. It is a combination of my aspergers plus having a number of these INTP traits. http://www.16personalities.com/intp-personality

These traits lead me to care more about trying to obtain truth than respecting social traditions especially when the traditions are based upon ideas that are faulty and contradictory. When something makes no sense, is contradictory, and is illogical my brain shuts down.

America is not a thinking society or a philosophical based society but is a business oriented society. The business of America is business itself and even though people have different religions here my observation is America itself is the religion. Even the interpretation of the bible and God in America today is subjected to the culture itself. Christians tell you all the time that God is the supreme of all but based upon their actions God is not. The interpretation of God and the bible is subordinated to the culture itself. Unofficially, America itself is the supreme religion of the land.

This is where I clash. To me, there is an objective truth(s) outside of all of us.

If you go online and read comments in various boards including yahoo a lot of people in America are unhappy with way things are. Yet, no one can change them because those around them accepts things as they are. This is where I do accept that attitude and beliefs can help to shape reality. Acceptance causes the beliefs and attitude of the state of reality. Attitude and beliefs of the state of reality causes the acceptance. It is a paradox that I can't get others to perceive at all. The effect becomes the cause and the cause becomes the effect. We have what is called a causality loop.

Guess what? Even if people agree with me they still fall into this loop. I am able to perceive all of this due to my personality type and how I was raised. All of this is why I have a difficult time functioning in society and why I am on SSDI today. The truth is we (humanity) are the harbingers of our own doom. It is like we're cannibals and we're eating each other and we're eating ourselves but I can't get others to stop doing this because the people feel like they have to do this survive.

Maybe this is what Socrates saw in ancient Athens as well and maybe this is why he chose to take Hemlock at least this may be one of the main reasons. Socrates could've chosen to escape but why did he not. He felt like he was doing the right thing by challenging the conventions of the day. Certain charges were brought up like corruption of the youth. He felt he was doing nothing wrong but was found guilty. I believe he was offered a plea and that was to stop practicing philosophy. He could not do this. He felt it would be wrong to do so against the greater law, the gods of the day, etc. He felt he broke no laws and no rules and was not a criminal. He could've escaped but he felt like it would be criminal to do so he chose to accept his death sentence.

His crime was to challenge the conventions of the day and show them their contradictions and the only reason it was a crime was because the ancient Athenians' identities were based upon both nature and the nurturing from their culture. By challenging the culture you challenge and can possibly destroy someone's identity and ego.

History repeats itself today. What I see today is people being to pragmatic and accepting things as they are to a very rigid level even if those things are a falsehood, rhetoric and illogical. There is no attempt to question these assumptions and to seek objective truth or any truth at all. Let's look at the debates between Obama and Romney. There was no attempt to seek truth but to win with rhetoric. There was no substance to any of the debates at all.

People say it is what it is. I ask, why is it this way and why does it have to be when a good chunk of the people are unhappy?

How do we all live our lives? What is our purpose? What is the essence of a good life? What does it mean to be noble? What is virtue and what is a vice? What is the meaning to our lives? What is the purpose of Aspergers and Autism? To me, there has to be more than our various lives in our various cultures across the planet? What is the meaning to it all? What is the ultimate answer to all of this?

It can't just be about making money and survival. Those with the ISTJ personality type seem to say this is all there is. To me, there has to be something more. Reality as we know it can't just be it.

This is why I can't function. What is the essence of all of existence? No one seems to have a solid answer including these women. It's like the ultimate answers come from the culture itself. What is beyond the cultures?

It's interesting reading this stuff because I used to feel this way a lot. For me it was when the ideology I held about science and the field of psychology collided with reality. The more I learned about how things are actually done, what gets published and what gets accepted as fact, the more disillusioned I became. As I spoke to other graduate students in other fields, we had the same sorts of conversations. The way I see things now is that every human construct, whether it's a government or organisation or society, is going to be deeply flawed because it is made by humans. They all have a combination of high ideals and petty concerns, and often the two are inconsistent; often the ideals get overlooked as a result.

I think the contrast between ideals and reality is something that most young adults struggle with to some extent. But I understand that, being on the spectrum, consistency is probably much more important to you. I can't offer you any explanations or answers other than just acceptance. For me, it's been that simple, we are all humans, and we do things for various reasons; not all of them are high-minded, logical, or even well-intentioned. The result is our world is very chaotic, and not often consistent, although we like to pretend oterwise. Indeed, Orwell was not trying to describe America, he was trying to describe humanity (and authoritarianism).

With regards to double-think, I don't think it's necessary to use double-think to be successful. I do think it's important to maintain an understanding of your own personal goals and ideals, and then understand the rules that society will operate under. With that understanding, you then need to make strategic choices with your own actions. Is having and winning each and every battle important, even if it results in losing a war?

With regards to ideals, I believe it's important to think of them more as compass directions than as destination points; I may be going north, but I'm not trying to be North. The same goes for all ideals, let them guide your decision making, but accept that we are not going to be perfect.

lol everything you said is an understatement and more



All of this is true but therein lies the problem. I'm not trying to be nasty or anything and if I come across that way I apologize. I've been given the same advice you've given me now and that is to simply accept it or to put it another way get in the real world. My response is our very acceptance of reality is what helps to shape our reality. There is some truth to what people believe about attitude and belief.



Again, therein lies the problem. What if by all of us accepting this reality we all lose as a whole in the end? You're looking at it from a more individualistic ethos instead of looking at all of the components in an inter-related whole. None of us lives in a vacuum. This is one of the issues I see with the American way of thinking. It is to slanted towards the individualist mindset in an extreme manner. It is just as bad as slanting towards the extreme communitarian way as well. My own actions and choices do matter to a certain extent and the inter-related whole has to be included as well.

Because of this individualist mindset people are expected to "pull themselves by their own bootstraps" no matter what external circumstances there are. In fact, the belief is with rare exception anyone is capable of doing it. In fact, we're all expected to be self-sufficient when in truth total self-sufficiency is a lie. In a society, we're all inter-dependent on each other to certain extents.

If this was scaled back a bit I believe a) people who need help would actually get it or at least some people b) our country would be better as a whole. We definetly don't need to go the other extreme like communism.




I can give you the contrary. We can't stray to off course lest we be shipwrecked in a place we don't want to be. This is what I see with America as a whole.

I just feel a sense of frustration and futility.

I agree with you in general... and it is certainly frustrating. I don't find you "nasty", I was just trying to offer you some options to help quiet that frustration enough to cope.

With regards to individualism vs communalism, I heard an interview (sorry forgot the source) on the topic a while ago and they discussed how both traits are selected in humans; where communities that have communalism as a value are more successful than those that don't, whereas individualists within those communities are more successful than those that aren't. So in terms of evolution, both traits are preserved. When asked if we should do away with selfishness, the guy said that it would make us like ants, completely subservient to the group with no individual understanding or concerns. This duality between the two ideals is what makes us special as a species, and while it's problematic, it's also fascinating and beautiful.

The reason I stress individual responsibility is because I can't easily change society to be better for you, even if I want to help. The best I can do is guide you to find a way to make it work, and for that to work, you need to be the one to take action - hence individualism...it doesn't make me opposed to communalist concerns.

I don't know how much game theory you are or are not familiar with, but sometimes the sum of individual maximizing behavior ends up being worse for everyone -- a version of the classic "Prisoner's Dilemma."

I don't have an answer as how not to be frustrated with it.

Wherever you are on the spectrum of individualism vs. community there are always opportunity costs. The more independent you can be, the less people are "up in your business." I do not know of any culture where there is an ample safety net but you can do whatever you want and be who you want to be. Usually there is a correlation between help and meddling. It is especially problematic for aspies (and for NTs) who are are not able to/find it soul sucking to conform but who also need help.

Think of it in a family context. If you notice, even on this board, in a family setting there is this issue. Young adults who are not self-supporting and living at home have to follow house rules they do not like and often nagged about various things including sometimes the very nature of who they are. When they move out, they have the freedom to draw boundaries.

It works like that in cultures, too. Help usually come with many rules and/or a lot of social pressure to conform. Countries that do not codify excessive laws often have a tremendous social pressure to conform. Where you want to be on that continuum is a highly personal choice. Of course it is hard to escape ones culture and enter another.

I know. I appreciate it my friend. Maybe you're right in the end.







I get what you're saying. I guess you're right. I don't like it but neither of us are in any position to do anything. Do you have any suggestions on what I can do now? I have the feeling these women will not be much help. I find it fascinating as well. Maybe this is what Buddhism is all about. What if there was a way to find a middle way amongst all of these belief systems. To be honest with you, without major help and instruction I cannot take any action so therefore I can't take complete control of my life like and take personal responsibility for my own life.

This will go into more about it. http://whyifailedinamerica.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/42/

I feel no qualms about collecting SSDI. I was able to earn it through what little money I was able to earn. If I do not understand how to take responsibility and society nor my family will teach me nor can teach me I feel no obligation to taking responsibility to taking responsibility for my life.

Any standard I don't grasp how to follow and if this standard can't be taught to me nor will be taught to me then I have no obligation in following.

You say take action. I say I don't know what action to take and how to take answer and if no one feels obligated to instruct me in detail or is able to instruct me in detail then I feel no obligation on my part to take any action. It is similar to the idea of knowing the difference between right wrong.

Under the McNaughton definition of insanity one can be found insane and not culpable in a crime if he does not understand the difference between right and wrong. In cases like murder I do know the difference between right and wrong so therefore I can and should be made accountable if I murdered someone.

On the other hand, taking responsibility for one's life like obtaining and keeping a job is not something I am obligated to do under the concept and idea behind the McNaughton rule if I am unteachable or no one will instruct. Coming to the boards is not enough I and others on the spectrum need help from society at large.

Last edited by cubedemon6073 on 27 Jan 2014, 4:48 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I am familiar with it. I have studied it a little bit.



The main thing I'm frustrated about is when things are promoted as a,b,c but they're really x,y,z. How things actually work is different from what is said. It is strange to me.



You're right there are opportunity costs. You know what, it would've been better if this was presented to me as a child instead of telling me to be myself and what not. The concept of these opportunity costs gives the full story instead of stating something and I find out later there is an opposite that is implied sometimes.

Even with the story of Socrates his decisions both led to positive and negative outcomes for himself and society. There was costs to himself when he did what he did. It would be helpful if one was presented both sides of the story instead of as a child and teen things being fed in a slanted way. It would be helpful if the child was shown how to look for both the benefits and costs to himself and those around him. You're way of putting it gives the whole story.



True! I never would've thought the family setting was a type of society but I guess it is. I just wish people would quit using clichés that are so vague and that only present half-truths and half the story. Telling one to be true to himself does not tell the full story.



Actually, I don't mind conforming and I can deal with not knowing the reasoning behind something even if I don't like it. What gets me is where I'm told one thing and it is really not or it is only a part of the story. Your way of presenting it provides more of the story. Why can't other people do this?

I made my decisions and went with a flow based upon my interpretation of what was told to me and what was expected of me. If I had the knowledge of exactly what one was supposed to do the day I entered college and long before I graduated I would've did things completely different. With my families help and the learning center's help I would've been doing a lot more internships after I did some classes in my freshmen and sophomore year on my own. I would've switched my therapists to those who specialize in the autism spectrum. In addition, I did not know that personality and social skills was the greater emphasis until I graduated college.

In addition, Information Technology for the most part went to India. There are a lot of people who with IT degrees who are having issues getting an IT job. I was socially unaware and because of my social unawareness combined with other factors I was looking at the trees instead of the forest. I would've switched my major to something that was more viable. The autism center could've helped with all of this.

I would've waited to get married as well until I was secure in being able to get and keep employment. On this, my recommendation for young aspies is don't get into a romantic relationship until they're able to get and keep employment.

This is the best way I can describe my emotional state. Consider the move, The Matrix. Imagine everything you know and thought was real is not real at all. Imagine being woken up all of a sudden in a world that is unlike the one you grew up with and the world you grew up with and understood was the false world. This is what I am dealing with.

In a nutshell (It is a lot over time which would take me a while to type out.) I will keep it brief.

The problem is I don't know how to deal with the practicality of day to day life including knowledge of what one is supposed to do to find and keep a job especially a job in information technology. All of the jobs posted require multiple skills each requiring years of experience. What was I supposed to do.

I tried to get a job outside of IT. I would put in my application and I would receive no call back. I would call them like suggested and all I would receive is a canned message which is they would call me back when they needed me. I tried applying to publix. I tried applying to be a bellboy at hotel chains. I tried applying to walmart. No avail.

I even tried going to voc rehab. At the last minute after writing their report they made the decision they could not help me. They recommended the autism center. Guess what? That is every other week $100.00 for only one hour. It's $200.00 per month for 2 hours per month. We can't afford this.

There are others like me in the same boat with lack of knowledge as to how the practicalities of the USA works and what the heck one is supposed to do to live his day to day live. What I have come to discover through the back tracking of phrases like "you're entitled to nothing" and no one is owed a free lunch, life is not fair, etc, etc is we live with a belief system that is not only fallacious in nature it is harming people who need help because they will never receive help. The belief system is one is always responsible for his life, one can always pull himself by his bootstraps, one is to put on this façade of optimism and happiness, and one can and should overcome any obstacle without any help whatsoever. Because of the current zeitgeist that exists in America today people who desperately need help will not receive it.

It isn't just knowing how to succeed it is about being forced to being something one is not. A cat has to pretend to be a dog.

This man, Winston Wu, sees the very things I see:

http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page30.htm
http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page31.htm
http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page32.htm
http://www.happierabroad.com/ebook/Page31a.htm

The social scene is made to seem like it is carefree and inclusive when it truthfully is not. What is promoted is opposite from what actually occurs. So, what can one do if one is having major issues functioning at all in society and his day to day life and even his own family like society keeps focusing on the wrong things like his attitude when it is not They treat attitude and confidence that one can simply turn on. America says honesty is the best policy but yet I and others are expected to pretend to be something we're not, be confident when we don't feel that way at all and display positivity and pretend to feel everything is okay when it is not. America demands self-reliance and independence but what if the person cannot without major help to do so.

What does the person do? He starts ask questions, reads things like philosophy and math. He does this because he is forced to because no one could or would tell him what one was supposed to do to obtain a job. Answers lead to further questions to try to clear up contradictions and so on and so forth until he realizes how much double-think exists and how dysfunctional it all is. At first, this person was trying to figure out how to effectively function until he realizes society itself is dysfunctional and is slowly eating itself alive. Yet, one can't point this out as a possible truth because it goes against the social veneer. One is not allowed to blame any external entities no matter what the circumstances are. This is all part of this whole internal locus of control and personal responsibility mantra.

Even ASDMommy briefly brought up Game Theory. What I see is an extremely competitive society in which people will do what it takes to get ahead no matter the cost. This is a win-lose scenario and we will all lose in the end. What I see and I have come to similar conclusions as Dr. Morris Berman is that what made the USA great is what is tearing us apart because we as Americans have taken the beliefs to their extreme conclusion. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Berman

There is no convincing anyone of any of this to reverse course. The very narrative we're on won't allow it.

I brought up Game Theory, not because I am a fan, (I am not) but it is occasionally a useful tool to analyze why certain things happen. In the instance I gave, it explains why the natural incentives for individuals often can lead to undesirable outcomes for society as a whole. In addition, what a society deems is best (or maybe its most powerful members) is not necessarily best on an individual basis for many and even most of its individuals.

I know that does not help trying to navigate pragmatically through life, but I understand why it bothers you. I don't like it, either.