NTs, I don't understand what motivates you

Post Reply New Topic

It's interesting to say the least, that a question is asked about what NT's want. But when the NTs answer the question, the answers are totally disregarded for some more fantastical answers.

If the idea is to have a lively discussion about "them vs us", then carry on. But if you actually want something closer to the truth, always remember that just as diverse as people on the spectrum are, so are people not on the spectrum.

If this was an inquisitive question then I would answer it since I am NT. However, it is a rhetorical question and rhetorical questions are not intended to be answered. You have already decided that the answer is "sex and power".

I'd say they're mainly motivated by 'the win' ie they want to come out on top in any competition in terms of money, social status, power, influence - anything. In any situation and interaction they want to be the winner or on the winning side by association.

To come to the OP's defense, he/she is trying to make an educated guess. And sex and power do seem to be the primary goals of many TV characters. And since NTs don't usually share what motivates them, that's all the OP has to go on.

If you really wanted to help, explain why you were offended and then tell us what motivates you as an NT. You strike me as feigning offense.

I am offended by rhetorical questions that pose as inquisitive questions because they do not allow for answers that are different from the rhetoric.





I am motivated by:

1)taking care of my family and spending time with them

2)protecting my family and myself from injury, disease and general danger. this would be "survival" and I see it as separate from "taking care of" which is more about cooking and general help.

3)Socializing. This is very enjoyable and is a major source of happiness (dopamine) for me. I don't want to have sex with the people I socialize with or have power over them. I just want to be with them, to connect with them.

4)Curiosity. I want to know who/how/what/when/ and mostly why- about many things.

This list is a reflection of my age (which is middle aged). When I was younger, category (1) didn't exist for me and category (2) only existed for myself and only a little. I took care of myself to some extent and protected myself to some extent but not as much as now. Age brings fears of mortality. In my youth, categories (3) and (4) were dominant.

This list is my own. It can't be extrapolated to any other NT although there will clearly be overlaps with others. Different people are motivated by different things and a person will be motivated by different things at different times in their lives. This includes people that the OP comes in contact with. There is little point in or possibility of making a blanket explanation of motivations that will cover all NTs. Attempts to do so, rather than trying to figure out what is motivating a specific individual, will lead to misunderstandings and conflict. Assuming that person B is motivated by X just because person A is will lead to intense conflict.

In terms of 3) Socialising and the happiness you feel from connecting with people, if when you were in social situations you suffered a lot of rejection and not connecting with people, would you still want to do it/get pleasure from it?

I have been in situations where I was rejected by and did not connect with the majority of people I was with at that time. In those situations I put up my radar to find other people who were also separate from the group (either by choice or by rejection). This is a common NT Nerd strategy and I have always been a Nerd. The people that I connected with in those situations were not necessarily fellow nerds. But I have not found myself in a group situation where I connected with literally no one and was rejected by literally everyone. If I ever did, I assume I would attempt to find some animals and connect with them (a strategy that is described quite frequently on WP). If I was repeatedly rejected by literally every person I ever encountered then I would find no pleasure in attempting to connect with them. This is why I understand posters who find no pleasure in it and who prefer animals. It is an emotionally logical reaction.

Thanks for this information, it fits with my theory that the extent to which a person will enjoy socialising/being with other people is based directly upon the amount of acceptance from and connection to the other people that they experience.

Can I also ask about how you define rejection. For example if you go into a shop and the person serving you is not friendly and talkative to you, would you see this as rejection, especially if you see them being friendly and talkative to other customers.
To what extent do you expect to make a connection with the different people you come across in different situations in life?

Also, how do you determine the quality of a connection?

the group mind uses all sorts of masks to conceal its motivations. some of them are images; some, emotions. "power" implies there is a non-reciprocal relation between controllers & controlled. however, no one is more in the grip of control than the one in charge.

unfortunately, there is no privileged vantage from which to observe. those who are by nature excluded, are not subject to the same forces. they only feel a lack of meaning to what occurs around them. interrogation of one isolated member of the group mind, can only produce the usual formulas of absolution.

but what happens when you oppose the group interaction is worth analyzing. there is, on one hand, the stereotyping of ingroup/outgroup features--to whatever degree the initial commotion provokes, like antibodies, ranging from "malcontent" to "homicidal maniac." on the other hand, to the degree that intimacy exists in regard to any separate member, the group mind retreats & can be talked about reasonably.

as long as you don't try to argue that the group mind is "wrong". it can't be wrong. it is simply one of the forces on this planet, just as gravity is.

I seek knowledge, romantic love, and physical/emotional comfort.

I would not see that as a rejection despite the disparity between how they interacted with me (all business) and how they interacted with other customers. It happens sometimes when I shop at a store I have never been to before or go to infrequently. I am a stranger so they are all business with me but friendly and talkative with their regular customers who they know. They aren't rejecting me. They are simply chatting up the regulars. If I want to be "let in" and chatted up even though I am a stranger, I make some small talk. I realize that initiating small talk (or even following up someone else's initiation) is hard or even brutally boring and unpleasant for many on this board. There have been so many threads.




It is situational. In very brief encounters, I expect to make a very brief connection. A little small talk, perhaps only a few sentences each, makes the encounter frictionless and enjoyable. But I do not expect a lasting connection or anything with any depth (it's the "small" in small talk.) If I am going to spend a modest amount of time with somebody who is not otherwise a part of my life, I want to make a solid but not deep connection. An example is other parents at my daughters' school who I will see for an hour or two here and there at various meetings and functions for a few school years. We need a more solid connection than the "nice weather" small talk made with bus drivers and shop clerks but it doesn't need to be an enduring connection because we are only in each other's lives for a few years.

I expect to make the deepest and most enduring connections with people who will be part of my life for many years, perhaps my whole life or a big chunk of it. This includes family (a connection must be made deliberately when somebody marries in), life friends, coworkers (except temps who I make a solid but non-enduring connection with) and neighbors.



I determine the quality of the connection by the ease with which we do things together such as accomplishing a common goal or socializing. (Example of common goal with clerk: doing the transaction I came in for. Example of common goal with neighbor: bringing in each other's mail when one or the other is on a trip.) I realize that this ease is hard to come by in AS-NT interactions and may account for at least some of the friction between AS and NT people.

No, you are entirely wrong.

I phrased it very vaguely, but I am genuinely curious and baffled about what drives some of the NT social interactions I witness/experience, and feel as if I am too innocent by comparison, and do not understand why this may be so; hence my alluding flippantly to sex and power. But I did not think of them as absolutes.

Please do answer, I meant it seriously and really, truly am interested in how it works for you.

This is true. I do not understand why I am so innocent and naive compared to some NTs, and sex and power seem less innocent drives than mine, which are merely to fulfill my curiosities and stay out of trouble. More or less.

Or, I suppose, I go about my desires for certain things very, very differently than a typical NT person seems to. If I may so crudely posit that typical NT people exist (I also appreciate the nunaces, don't you worry!! !!)

ok I understand. My answer is upthread (I don't want to cut and past it as it is pretty long). I gave four dominant motivations in my life at this point in time. But they won't apply to anyone else (although they may overlap) and every interaction has its' own smaller motivations that apply to that particular interaction at that particular time with that particular person. I hope you don't take the sum (or the overalps) of the NT answers in this thread and then apply them to people you meet. Attempting to map one person's specific motivation onto another random person can only end badly.

I categorize and pigeonhole everyone. I see NTs as a wide variety of types of people. There are people with many different priorities and many different mechanisms to try to get what they want. An example might be some nurses and social workers who prioritize being compassionate and trying to help people versus Dick Cheney or Romney where profits reign.