Things YOU Understand (but Don't Understand) About NTs

Post Reply New Topic

This is essentially how I've come to view the NT take on autism. Unless some autistics truly are oblivious of what's going on and don't know why they're having social difficulties. I think many of us actually do understand. The NTs think we don't, because to them to understand is to comply. And when we don't comply, we're viewed as defective or lacking in theory of mind. The cardinal rule is to not question these things which are "natural," and presume those who do must not be "in the know."

In fact, perhaps the problem is that many of them lack the ability to critically think and question the dynamic, therefore, they don't even realize such questioning is possible.

So what you're saying is they have ToM with others who are like themselves. ToM, then, really means "Theory of NT Mind," or "Theory of Non-Autistic Mind," or "Theory of Hive Mind."

But I disagree with you that ToM has to mean both understanding and then acting accordingly to the social dynamic. ToM could also include fully understanding how the process works, but consciously rejecting it. You're saying ToM is completely unconscious and unquestioned. Therefore, questioning the very nature, the why, equates to having no theory of mind?

And what are these things that Cyd fails to understand exactly? You're speaking very cryptically, but not actually answering the question. Unless you're saying it's completely impossible to express it in words, which I doubt.

Hmmm... that's not actually true. To feel insecure about something would require more interest than I have in that particular subject. I spent many years observing and sussing out why people do the things they do until I reached the point where it no longer mattered. I identified the "game" at which point the subject ceased to interest me.

I'm not saying I don't have insecurities - it's entirely possible that I do - I just can't imagine what they might be. Fear and worry aren't really my thing.

TOTALLY missed this - sorry!

"Think about it" isn't going to cut it. Let's have the reasoning behind this declaration. And I'm not being sarcastic. I really want to hear how you got from insecurity to growth, let alone the idea that growth requires insecurity.

Having a working "Theory of Mind" means understanding the full range of communication - the non-verbal such as eyes, hands, posture. Along with that is the understanding of the cultural aspects of another mind, via that geographical area.

The above is imperfect as individuals vary in education and ability to read people. From what I've seen posted up, many NT introverts and Gifted people find 'a ToM challenge' with the above.

But generally, say if someone encounters a foreigner and cannot speak the language, they can still communicate the universal emotions and ideas via signing to convey something of use - I've seen this in action.
It, "ToM," appears to be homogeneous due to most people being close to the mean of culture, IQ, introversion-extroversion.

I don't think there is anything more to the theory of theory of mind?

If that's all it is, based upon that definition, then it's not really applicable to what I was saying about flat out questioning the "social code." I don't believe it all boils down to not understanding; I think in many instances there is understanding but a rejection of what is practiced w/o deviation by everyone else.

Also, how could one distinguish AS from "gifted" NT, or from "highly introverted" NT? What differences would there be and where would a line be drawn? Ultimately, isn't the end result the same regardless?

Well, the AS line, is being sunk deeper in the inability to fully gauge communications - "ToM:" As being amiss on some form of communication. It may be in the inability to use the non -verbal, but fully understanding it. Or it's a mix of it, ( not getting any of it) and/or with the language e.g., metaphors, etc. (And there is the repetitive behavior with AS - "executive functioning.")

Someone Gifted thinks differently and is culturally separated from the "mean," but is not impaired with the above. Introverts are the same.

I'm not saying any of things THAT you have stated I said. It's as IF you have a pre-scripted monologue THAT you are adhering to. No. I am saying by definition ,the ability to recognize the mind states of others in relation to ones self, ToM is attenuated(slightly to significantly) in Autists. I am saying THAT across the spectrum there exists a number of Autists, due to HOW ToM has affected them, who would find it difficult to function in society. I'm saying a number of Autistics experience a disruption of ToM THAT in all good consciouness can not be attributed to and goes far beyond a comparison linking "Theory of NT Mind", "Theory of Non-Autistic Mind", or Theory of Hive Mind" to Non_Autists. I am saying ToM figures heavily into the defining characteristic of Autism Spectrum Disorders...impairment in socialization.

I am NOT saying ToM has to do both with understanding and acting accordingly to social dynamics. BUT, if you do NOT understand 'why' in this case, the mind-states of others in making (a plethora of decisions) THAN by definition ToM is not being executed.

One can also know how a process works and still be unable to use it in practical applications.

TheSunAlsoRises

I never said, fear and worry were your insecurities.

It's true.

TheSunAlsoRises

I dont understand why they are always judging people in everything There is a certain specification to which they must follow and certain standards. You must follow them and be exactly the same (Few exceptions) or else you are considered something bad (not going to say any)

I understand because I usually judge people about things and try to follow the certain standards. As part of my personality I have to follow the standards one of my AS traits.

Aspergers appears to be no longer a separate category of it's own under Pervasive Developmental Disorders.

It has been absorbed by a category referred to as Autism Spectrum Disorders.

In lieu of this change, more so than ever, i have to broaden my view in regards to trying to access the different dynamics of Autism.

It's mandatory THAT i travel along the entire spectrum.....


TheSunAlsoRises

That's interesting about understanding the non-verbal but not being able to reciprocate. It's like being mute, able to listen and understand a conversation but unable to respond. The gifted and the introvert NTs, presumably, still use the non-verbal.

But I was actually trying to get at social dynamics that most people abide by without question, not simply non-verbal miscommunication. I do think this thread got a little side-tracked, and I think there's more to it then just non-verbal communication differences.

It's possible that understanding and using non-verbal communication ties in with other factors that make one want to abide by social rules. But I was addressing the rules more than the communication, why the rules are so thoroughly accepted, why they're not questioned, etc.

But in the scenario that the other poster gave, you used the terminology "appeared obvious to them." Yet, it was a miscommunication between the aspie and the NTs. You're saying the aspie lacked ToM in understanding how the NTs think, and how they comprehended and interpreted the non-verbals. But essentially, the NTs did the exact same thing with the autistic. What they believed was "obvious," they were actually incorrect about. It was indeed presumptuous, but I'm assuming such presumptions are correct when dealing with other non-autistics, so they're perceived to be true in all situations.

In that sense, ToM would specifically be more accurately labeled "Theory of Non-Autistic Mind," as in this scenario, the NTs didn't take into consideration that the aspie had a different take, and different mindset. They fell back on what they believed to be "obvious," even though it was miscommunication. How is it the autistic is the only one lacking the ToM? Please explain.

It also seems as if not understanding why another person behaves a certain way implies an impairment of ToM. However, what if one understands that others think differently, but rejects their logic? In other words, not an obliviousness, but rather a rejection of their specific logic. Or does rejection automatically mean lacking ToM?

Can you describe the workaround?

Is there a wacky, NT "fearless and carefree" definition of insecurity that I don't know about? Did I mention that I don't play "the game"? Let me rephrase that - Did I mention that I don't play "the stupid NT game"? You're intent on defending your original declaration but you cannot - I've told you it wasn't true. If you think I'm lying, say so. If you just don't like the idea that someone you consider to be "defective" feels secure, then say so. If you have insecurities and the idea of someone like me not having any ticks you off or threatens your view of the world, say so. Or if you're afraid of admitting you were wrong, just say so. Because if you think you don't like where this has gone, so far - you're REALLY not going to like where it goes if you continue because while I may not play "the NT game", I'm not at all averse to "playing" with my food before I eat it.

edit to add: I neglected to add the obvious choice - if you think I'm too "stupid" to know that I "should" feel insecure, say so. I can't very well address what you're "thinking" if you refuse to admit what it is. You can't hurt my feelings. Not because I don't have any, but because you simply don't have that power.

The difference between you and I is that if I'm wrong, I want to KNOW it - so you'd actually be doing me a great favor if you would explain the logic behind your claim. I'm not like you - I LOVE being wrong. Consequently, I don't have to slam the brakes on my thought processing to consider what others might think of me every 30 seconds, like an NT, because I don't care about such things. I will, however, slow it down so that you can keep up, if you're willing. If you've got something, whoop it out. Even if you think it will sound crazy. Actually, ESPECIALLY if you think it sounds crazy - there's a lot more gold to be found in "crazy" than in "normal", "tip-toeing" crap because there is very seldom anything "normal" that hasn't already been considered - although, there could be something extraordinarily "simple", that I missed "way back when". That happens.