Types of Aspergers

Post Reply New Topic

I like categorising

The Emotional Type

The emotional type is less likely to lean toward analysis and rules.

* This individual is controlled by feelings rather than rational thought.
* Many of their emotions might be difficult to control, and this can lead to anxiety and tension.
* Individuals who fall into the emotional subcategory might experience more frustration, and they may act out more than other types.
* Structure and order help to calm and organize this behavior.

Of course it's not the same for everyone. The way I see it, though, the goal is to make diagnosis obsolete. As science marches on, we won't have more categories. We'll blur the lines and turn services into something similar to...

Oh, similar to the way vision is treated, I guess. We don't bother to classify visual impairment as high-functioning or low-functioning. When it matters (for determining what kind of glasses to get, if any, and what adaptations to make to life or school, if any), it's measured precisely, and not just in terms of how impaired you are. (Because someone who's very farsighted might be as impaired as I am, but we couldn't wear the same glasses.) And then with that information, you choose how to deal with it. Do you get glasses? When do you wear them? What color, what material, do you want an ARC? Do you want prisms, or will you just suffer through having double vision? (There's never been any shame for me in choosing that last one. People even think it's cool when I show them my lazy eye. Why can't they react to my stims the same way?) But when it comes to how people react, they don't need labels; a simple "I'm nearsighted" would suffice if for some reason my glasses didn't. If anyone who knew me even in passing found me without my glasses and struggling, all I'd have to say is "no, I don't wear contacts" and they'd understand if I couldn't see something... but they'd know I'm not totally blind, and would probably not be so idiotic as to assume I'd act exactly like everyone else out there who's nearsighted.

I like the idea to keep it simple stupid, so I'm not really here to agree on the idea that there are sub-diagnosis or anything. I'm kinda into the whole thing of evolving our mental health for the sake of evolution. I think there are a lot of things that are unnecessary labels in this world and embrace the Austistic Spectrum Disorder vs Autism & Aspergers & High functioning Autism.

I got a bit upset over this post, but I had some time in water (baths usually calm me) and decided it was better to figure out a way to explain myself. I did not mean this for harm, just to find a way to break it all down. It's okay to break something down, but I don't believe in having a multitude of diagnosis that have similar subsets, brain locations that cause the same thing, etc, etc. I believe that brain science explains psychology and that itself means that we should definitely keep it simple.

But I like trees too, like this program called TreeSize for Windows to break down your harddrives into folders upon folders upon folders and files, informing you of what is taking up so much space:
http://www.jam-software.com/freeware/index.shtml

I don't really trust those categories. They look like someone just thought them up. And there's a lot of assumptions too -- like I'm very passive, but it doesn't mean I enjoy following rules, it means that I have trouble doing certain things to either seek out or avoid situations so I appear to just go along with whatever is happening much of the time.

There really are many sorts of autistic people, but this categorization scheme doesn't cut it. (Nor really do most others I've heard of -- both the categories made by "experts" and those made by laypeople seem to suffer from make-crap-up.)

I got to thinking about it, it does seem to me I have seen this post before and this website! lol I did go "Whaaaaat?" last time I looked at it, because it seems like they all coincide with each other.

If I am an aspie, then I am definitely the logic type.

Though it looks a lot like any kind of personnality test.

I don't think I fit any of these sub categories (at least not completely). The "logical sub-type" sounds a little like me, but I don't think i fit a stereotype.

I think I am the rules type .

i guess im logical
i was put in for a test at school for 'gifted' students when i was 12, to see what the best type of learning environment was for me and what my 'learning type' was. I got logical on that...
Im self diagnosed, but yeah, i think i fit into logical.

i have never been bright enough or i just wasn't born with enough logical neurons to be anything but an emotional aspie.

I agree with a previous statement that stated that the 'types' were too vague... but I'd probably fall into the 'Rule' type based on the little information given.

I am sure I have read a thread about this before on WP.

I'm not 100% sure i agree with this breakdown... but...

If i have to place myself, I think that at heart I'm in the emotional type, but have rejected my placement there and am trying to live as though I'm in the Logical type.
Though likely, if this categorization has any real merit, then I likely lie halfway between the two.

Though I also see aspects in me that meet the passive category. I have never been one who will push the envelope, I stand in line, wait my turn without complaint.