Is Asperger's the same thing as a very big ego?

Post Reply New Topic

I am not sure if I have Asperger's but I think I have it. My psychiatrist said he thought I have it, but I quit before I had a proper assessment.

I think that my traits seem very similar to what a big ego would mean. For example I'm sensitive and I am extreme at holding grudges.

I have been reading about Kabbalah, Jewish mysticism. They talk about the ego a lot. They say that the ego grows and grows as the soul evolves spiritually. And that Jews have a bigger ego than other people. I have also found very many similarities between aspies and Jews.

The etymology of the word autism:

Ger. Autismus, coined 1912 by Swiss psychiatrist Paul Bleuler (1857-1939) from Gk. autos- "self" (comb. form) + -ismos suffix of action or of state.

One definition of autism says:

"Abnormal introversion and egocentricity"

The whole thing about starseeds/chrystal children/indigo children etc. and the talk about aspies being the next step in the human evolution does resonate very much with Kabbalah in my view. It sure seems like aspies and Jews have a lot in common, and might actually be the same thing.

Here is a video talking about autism and spirituality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McsUc8ydzoM

What she says about being disordered only in the material but not in the consciousness, about having one foot in and one foot out, all of it again makes me think Asperger's/autism and Jews might have something in common or even be the same thing. Compare with the view that a lot of people, for example many Muslims, have of Jews. They view them as evil, corrupt, mad etc.

Here's the Jewish leader "the Rebbe" saying autistics don't relate to people but relate more to God than other people do:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fBjUmj95r6g

I believe there might be a lot to my speculations. And I believe that psychiatry is mind control. Not sure to what extent the psychiatrists are "useful idiots" and to what extent they are not. Even though I believe the whole thing is mind control and Orwellian Newspeak I actually think it serves a good purpose ultimately. It is social control that makes the world more and more oppressive, aka the totalitarian tip-toe, which ultimately enlightens humanity spiritually in my opinion, even though a lot of the people driving it are useful idiots or have lower desires than enlightening others. We are all part of the conspiracy really. And the mind control also serves another purpose. By not falling for it but analyzing it, reflecting upon it, researching the roots of it and the hidden meanings etc. it actually becomes part of the path towards liberation. And I also find in my own life that my resentment towards my psychiatrist and psychiatry helped me indirectly a lot. It made me begin to seriously question all of reality and to become a spiritual seeker. In a sense psychiatry seems to work as a filter, filtering out those who are not ready to ascend from those who are. Separating the wheat from the chaff you could say. Some are meant to go back to the illusion and work there according to their abilities, and some will not buy the lies. Compare with exoteric religion and the occult/esoteric/initiation. I think the movie the Matrix might be an allegory of both Jews/Gentiles and aspies/neurotypicals, which again might be the same thing or might not. Neo is the Jew/the aspie, and the agents are the Gentiles/the neurotypicals.

So my main question is: is Asperger's the same thing as a very big ego?

Another question I have been wondering about a lot: Do you think Sunni Islam is a religion for neurotypicals, or a religion for people who are totally stuck in the matrix, i.e. have not become Neo, have not seen through the matrix etc?

damn this forum is slow and boring

Interesting theory but pretty sure not all people with AS are jews....seems a little far fetched, though there are probably jews with autism. Also I don't really believe either group is 'the next step of evolution' I mean while there can be some kinda cool things about AS it still is a disorder that can cause difficulties in life....people who follow jewish philosophy would be doing so by choice I mean they have every right to get into different religions or reject religion all together if they want to....having aspergers isn't like following a religion/philosophy its something we are more or less stuck with.

Not sure I entirely get the ego thing, but haven't really looked much into ego and what it means in judaism, I know what it means in psychology....and well based on that I'd say a large majority of people with AS do not have a big ego, and many have a lack of self confidence and what not, in psychology ego is basically like thinking you're better then others and the bigger the ego the more selfish the individual a lot of times.

Autism means being oriented inward to the self, as opposed to the social group- in a certain way- thats not quite the same thing as being "self absorbed" (though autistic can also be self absorbed, but so can nts).

But thats not quite the same thing as being 'egotistical'.

Folks who are SO egotistical that its pathological have a label. They are diagnosed as "narcissists", not as "autistics".

Autistics, if anything, are less likely to be narcissists than NTs.

Then you go further even out on a limb by somehow connecting autism/aspergers to Judaism.

Someone recently started a thread by asking if "aspies are the like the Jews enslaved in Egypt in the Old Testament?". But that person meant "aspies are jews" metaphorically. Not literally. And even on that level it didnt make much sense.

Boredom is for idle minds. Occupy yourself.

To answer you question: No it is not the same. Whilst we might be self absorbed in some sense, that doesn't translate to necessarily having bigger egos, and even being exactly the same.

There are plenty of people with big egos, we don't have an monopoly of it.

^^^^^^^That particular thread was also started by Mr tomato here.

To the OP - first, don't be so f*****g rude.

As to your point - no. I can't find it now, as they all tend to include the medical definition, but I came across a dictionary definition of autism as being bound up in one's inner world. That's not the same as having a big ego. The big ego sort demand everyone else marvel at their wonderousness, and is very sensitive about it. A cliched autist/aspergian experience would be not being able to tell just how boring one is being to others, and that they don't marvel. There's something I recall hearing about... ah, I remember. It doesn't fit at all perfectly, but we might consider Rousseau's comparison of Amour de soi to Amour-propre as autist and egoist, respectively:

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

As to any kind of 'aspies are more spiritual' - no. Someone's trying to sell you something. I often feel there are a number of things that, as the phrase has it, I didn't get the memo about. One of these is the necessity of being in social-economic competition with others. Doesn't mean I am in some way more 'pure'.

Personally, I think the conspiracy theorists are in on the conspiracy, to leave any kind of counter-movement based on the notion that 'there's something not right here' ridden with paranoia and fear and egoism and distrust and conflict.

I get the sense you want to be special. Good luck with that.

Hooray for the reply. Interesting thoughts. On gnosticteachings.org they claim that Jews are not only the people of the ethnic group that call themselves Jews, and that those who think that way misunderstand the scriptures. What are the ethnic group then is what I wonder. But some claim that a big part of the Jews today are not descendants of the group that supposedly existed that were the Israelites. I'm not sure at all what of the contents in the Old Testament actually physically happened and what is allegory alone. I also see it as a possibility that being Jewish could be a genetic thing, and inheritable, even if it's not a race or an ethnic group. While following Judaism is a choice, being Jewish probably isn't. If being Jewish is something totally different from what we're told then you've got to wonder why we're being lied to. Maybe it's a way to make sure that those who aren't ready for the next step are kept "asleep" and only those who seek out the information themselves, or come to the insights themselves, are fed the information that's considered appropriate. I mean maybe it's some kind of necessary action, a preventive measure or something. Something like what's referred to in the Bible as "don't throw pearls to swine"? Maybe kept in secret societies or something. I believe secret societies exist for protective reasons primarily.

I am researching the similarities/connection between Jews and Asperger's and here are some things I have found just briefly. The sources may or may not be correct. I might start a thread about it more specifically once I have more information.

-the race that has the highest percentage of Asperger's cases is the Ashkenazi Jews, i.e. the European Jews.
-Einstein was Jewish, and some claim he had Asperger's
-the main character in the movie Pi is Jewish, and as far as I can tell probably has Asperger's
-in this thread Judaism is claimed to have characteristics that would resonate with autistics, such as rocking motion during prayer, explicit rules http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt202156.html

Another interesting point is that in the episode Ass Burgers of South Park there are Matrix references, which may or may not have anything to do with Jews, but the Matrix probably has some kind of connection to religion. Why the name "Trinity"? And why does Neo say "Jesus" several times when Trinity is present?

-on another forum it was claimed that Jews as a group have the same intelligence profile as aspies: the average for Jews being higher verbal IQ than "whites" and somewhat lower performance IQ than "whites". This is claimed to be the same as for Asperger's but not for autism.

-both Jews and aspies seem to have a higher chance of having ectomorph physical traits and ectotonic temperament; i.e. they are often unathletic, shy, introvert, nerdy, awkward, sensitive, intellectual etc.

You said Asperger's is a disorder that can cause difficulties in life. I think it could still be the next step in evolution. Could be two sides of the same coin.

As I said I'm researching it so I don't have a lot to present at the moment and it's mostly a work hypothesis. I posted this thread to see if I could get any new info or ideas.

I agree that big ego means you're selfish, but I don't think a big ego equals strong self confidence. It is probably the reverse. The bigger the ego the easier you're hurt by others. You might appear self confident on the outside but that's just a facade to cover up the true emotions.

No. Next question?

haha I didn't mean to be rude. But this forum IS slow. It seems to have started flowing now though. I guess everyone was sleeping or out or something and got to their computers all at once.

Yes I have that negative characteristic of wanting to be special. That's part of why I thought I might have a big ego. After all, the definition of autism that I found online was "abnormal introversion and egocentricity". And for all I know some souls might be "special" in some regards, or just have come further at a particular point in time. I believe there is a lot of conditioning, mind control and Newspeak in the world. For example through how various mental conditions are viewed by the public. Why for example is there something called "messiah complex"? The word solipsism is interestingly mentioned in the book 1984, which Newspeak comes from also. George Orwell interestingly is claimed to have had Asperger's.

As for aspies being spiritual I myself don't remember being very spiritual prior to my spiritual awakening, but I've always had what I guess are the traits of Asperger's. Interestingly my change seems to have occurred just after I used marijuana for the first time. Maybe I have schizophrenia now? Maybe schizophrenia is just another case of Orwellian Newspeak. Michael Laitman, who has written about Kabbalah, talks about how Jews are from another planet, which might be metaphorical, and that they receive "a call" and are reminded of who they are and that they have work to do, and that prior to that "call" they thought they were like everyone else. This is coming from a Jew. I think all of what he said in that video, pretty much, would give you a number of diagnoses in mainstream society.

Here is the video by the way:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Od3LF_o ... e&t=15m20s

Last edited by tomato on 10 May 2014, 11:56 am, edited 2 times in total.

There is a scene in the Matrix where Neo meets Tank and Tank is all happy and excited and this dialogue takes place:

"I'm Tank. I'll be your operator.

You don't have any...

Holes? Nope. Me and my brother, Dozer, are 100% pure, old-fashioned, homegrown human. Born free right here, in the real world."

That might be representing that Neo is a "spiritual Jew" as Michael Laitman calls it, and then converts to Judaism possibly. And Tank was born Jewish and welcomes Neo into the community.

Not sure how that specifically connects to the topic of ego and autism, but I talked about Jews and further down about the change that occurred to me after I started using marijuana. So that's why I posted it. (The Jewish aspect was really my biggest interest with the thread so maybe I should have given it a different title. But as I said I'll maybe create another thread when I have more info.) By the way here's a guy claiming that marijuana "is from the stars":

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE55AdOuM1U[/youtube]

So marijuana is from space, and Jews are from space, and this forum is called "wrong planet". I'm not sure but there might be something hidden here...

Shoulda known it was the same guy who started both threads.


Dude

Just sleep it off.

Whatever substence you took- just sleep it off.


And don't rent the Matrix again.

A young lady friend who had been an mental institution as a child (but who now is a high functioning adult) called me up about after just watching the Matrix, and it clearly got her unglued and temporarily a little psycho. Some folks just shouldnt watch it.

I believe in the legalization of MJ, but some people should avoid it. I like my cousin who is a schizophrenic, and MJ doesn't help him.

Well, I'm an Aspie who happens to be a German Lutheran - though admittedly, I do have a little Jewish ancestry on my mother's side.
As for ego - well, I can certainly see how we Aspies might be perceived that way, as we tend to be obsessed with particular subjects, and might often come across as know-it-alls, even if that was never our intention. Only think of Sheldon Cooper.
As for holding grudges - Lordy, do I ever! I still hold grudges against people who had slighted or ridiculed me as far back as grade school! I even hold grudges against people who I have never encountered personally, but hold positions that I find offensive or completely wrong, especially if they hold political office.

lol




exactly

On the other hand there is nothing stopping some on the spectrum being egotistical, narcissistic or an arse. It isn't a mutually exclusive condition.

Quite. I remember Eddie Izzard having a bit in his routines about how, if someone is found to have done weird or bad things and is also a transvestite, their transvestism is taken to explain the matter, whereas, as he puts it, they're the 'weirdo transvestites'.

----

To the OP: The forum can be slow going (it surely draws most of its members from the US), but also what you say may not be of interest.

The Matrix is a film. A narrative. It lends itself particularly well to metaphor. That doesn't mean it should be taken as a mildly-dramatised documentary. I could write a story which could be taken as a metaphor implying that the stray cat we took in last year is in fact Jesus in feline form. That wouldn't mean said cat actually is the messiah.

To my mind, you are seeing far too much meaning in things. From my limited understanding, this is the sort of thing that tips into psychosis. Be careful. Perhaps leave the marijuana be for a while.

If we may excuse the archaic language ('madman'), GK Chesterton may be able to shed some light:

Let us begin, then, with the mad-house; from this evil and fantastic inn let us set forth on our intellectual journey. Now, if we are to glance at the philosophy of sanity, the first thing to do in the matter is to blot out one big and common mistake. There is a notion adrift everywhere that imagination, especially mystical imagination, is dangerous to man's mental balance. Poets are commonly spoken of as psychologically unreliable; and generally there is a vague association between wreathing laurels in your hair and sticking straws in it. Facts and history utterly contradict this view. Most of the very great poets have been not only sane, but extremely business-like; and if Shakespeare ever really held horses, it was because he was much the safest man to hold them. Imagination does not breed insanity. Exactly what does breed insanity is reason. Poets do not go mad; but chess-players do. Mathematicians go mad, and cashiers; but creative artists very seldom. I am not, as will be seen, in any sense attacking logic: I only say that this danger does lie in logic, not in imagination. Artistic paternity is as wholesome as physical paternity. Moreover, it is worthy of remark that when a poet really was morbid it was commonly because he had some weak spot of rationality on his brain. Poe, for instance, really was morbid; not because he was poetical, but because he was specially analytical. Even chess was too poetical for him; he disliked chess because it was full of knights and castles, like a poem. He avowedly preferred the black discs of draughts, because they were more like the mere black dots on a diagram. Perhaps the strongest case of all is this: that only one great English poet went mad, Cowper. And he was definitely driven mad by logic, by the ugly and alien logic of predestination. Poetry was not the disease, but the medicine; poetry partly kept him in health. He could sometimes forget the red and thirsty hell to which his hideous necessitarianism dragged him among the wide waters and the white flat lilies of the Ouse. He was damned by John Calvin; he was almost saved by John Gilpin. Everywhere we see that men do not go mad by dreaming. Critics are much madder than poets. Homer is complete and calm enough; it is his critics who tear him into extravagant tatters. Shakespeare is quite himself; it is only some of his critics who have discovered that he was somebody else. And though St. John the Evangelist saw many strange monsters in his vision, he saw no creature so wild as one of his own commentators. The general fact is simple. Poetry is sane because it floats easily in an infinite sea; reason seeks to cross the infinite sea, and so make it finite. The result is mental exhaustion, like the physical exhaustion of Mr. Holbein. To accept everything is an exercise, to understand everything a strain. The poet only desires exaltation and expansion, a world to stretch himself in. The poet only asks to get his head into the heavens. It is the logician who seeks to get the heavens into his head. And it is his head that splits.

It is a small matter, but not irrelevant, that this striking mistake is commonly supported by a striking misquotation. We have all heard people cite the celebrated line of Dryden as "Great genius is to madness near allied." But Dryden did not say that great genius was to madness near allied. Dryden was a great genius himself, and knew better. It would have been hard to find a man more romantic than he, or more sensible. What Dryden said was this, "Great wits are oft to madness near allied"; and that is true. It is the pure promptitude of the intellect that is in peril of a breakdown. Also people might remember of what sort of man Dryden was talking. He was not talking of any unworldly visionary like Vaughan or George Herbert. He was talking of a cynical man of the world, a sceptic, a diplomatist, a great practical politician. Such men are indeed to madness near allied. Their incessant calculation of their own brains and other people's brains is a dangerous trade. It is always perilous to the mind to reckon up the mind. A flippant person has asked why we say, "As mad as a hatter." A more flippant person might answer that a hatter is mad because he has to measure the human head.

And if great reasoners are often maniacal, it is equally true that maniacs are commonly great reasoners. When I was engaged in a controversy with the CLARION on the matter of free will, that able writer Mr. R.B.Suthers said that free will was lunacy, because it meant causeless actions, and the actions of a lunatic would be causeless. I do not dwell here upon the disastrous lapse in determinist logic. Obviously if any actions, even a lunatic's, can be causeless, determinism is done for. If the chain of causation can be broken for a madman, it can be broken for a man. But my purpose is to point out something more practical. It was natural, perhaps, that a modern Marxian Socialist should not know anything about free will. But it was certainly remarkable that a modern Marxian Socialist should not know anything about lunatics. Mr. Suthers evidently did not know anything about lunatics. The last thing that can be said of a lunatic is that his actions are causeless. If any human acts may loosely be called causeless, they are the minor acts of a healthy man; whistling as he walks; slashing the grass with a stick; kicking his heels or rubbing his hands. It is the happy man who does the useless things; the sick man is not strong enough to be idle. It is exactly such careless and causeless actions that the madman could never understand; for the madman (like the determinist) generally sees too much cause in everything. The madman would read a conspiratorial significance into those empty activities. He would think that the lopping of the grass was an attack on private property. He would think that the kicking of the heels was a signal to an accomplice. If the madman could for an instant become careless, he would become sane. Every one who has had the misfortune to talk with people in the heart or on the edge of mental disorder, knows that their most sinister quality is a horrible clarity of detail; a connecting of one thing with another in a map more elaborate than a maze. If you argue with a madman, it is extremely probable that you will get the worst of it; for in many ways his mind moves all the quicker for not being delayed by the things that go with good judgment. He is not hampered by a sense of humour or by charity, or by the dumb certainties of experience. He is the more logical for losing certain sane affections. Indeed, the common phrase for insanity is in this respect a misleading one. The madman is not the man who has lost his reason. The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason.

The madman's explanation of a thing is always complete, and often in a purely rational sense satisfactory. Or, to speak more strictly, the insane explanation, if not conclusive, is at least unanswerable; this may be observed specially in the two or three commonest kinds of madness. If a man says (for instance) that men have a conspiracy against him, you cannot dispute it except by saying that all the men deny that they are conspirators; which is exactly what conspirators would do. His explanation covers the facts as much as yours. Or if a man says that he is the rightful King of England, it is no complete answer to say that the existing authorities call him mad; for if he were King of England that might be the wisest thing for the existing authorities to do. Or if a man says that he is Jesus Christ, it is no answer to tell him that the world denies his divinity; for the world denied Christ's.

Nevertheless he is wrong. But if we attempt to trace his error in exact terms, we shall not find it quite so easy as we had supposed. Perhaps the nearest we can get to expressing it is to say this: that his mind moves in a perfect but narrow circle. A small circle is quite as infinite as a large circle; but, though it is quite as infinite, it is not so large. In the same way the insane explanation is quite as complete as the sane one, but it is not so large. A bullet is quite as round as the world, but it is not the world. There is such a thing as a narrow universality; there is such a thing as a small and cramped eternity; you may see it in many modern religions. Now, speaking quite externally and empirically, we may say that the strongest and most unmistakable MARK of madness is this combination between a logical completeness and a spiritual contraction. The lunatic's theory explains a large number of things, but it does not explain them in a large way. I mean that if you or I were dealing with a mind that was growing morbid, we should be chiefly concerned not so much to give it arguments as to give it air, to convince it that there was something cleaner and cooler outside the suffocation of a single argument. Suppose, for instance, it were the first case that I took as typical; suppose it were the case of a man who accused everybody of conspiring against him. If we could express our deepest feelings of protest and appeal against this obsession, I suppose we should say something like this: "Oh, I admit that you have your case and have it by heart, and that many things do fit into other things as you say. I admit that your explanation explains a great deal; but what a great deal it leaves out! Are there no other stories in the world except yours; and are all men busy with your business? Suppose we grant the details; perhaps when the man in the street did not seem to see you it was only his cunning; perhaps when the policeman asked you your name it was only because he knew it already. But how much happier you would be if you only knew that these people cared nothing about you! How much larger your life would be if your self could become smaller in it; if you could really look at other men with common curiosity and pleasure; if you could see them walking as they are in their sunny selfishness and their virile indifference! You would begin to be interested in them, because they were not interested in you. You would break out of this tiny and tawdry theatre in which your own little plot is always being played, and you would find yourself under a freer sky, in a street full of splendid strangers." Or suppose it were the second case of madness, that of a man who claims the crown, your impulse would be to answer, "All right! Perhaps you know that you are the King of England; but why do you care? Make one magnificent effort and you will be a human being and look down on all the kings of the earth." Or it might be the third case, of the madman who called himself Christ. If we said what we felt, we should say, "So you are the Creator and Redeemer of the world: but what a small world it must be! What a little heaven you must inhabit, with angels no bigger than butterflies! How sad it must be to be God; and an inadequate God! Is there really no life fuller and no love more marvellous than yours; and is it really in your small and painful pity that all flesh must put its faith? How much happier you would be, how much more of you there would be, if the hammer of a higher God could smash your small cosmos, scattering the stars like spangles, and leave you in the open, free like other men to look up as well as down!"

- Orthodoxy