Do aspies often operate at a much deeper level of analysis?

Post Reply New Topic

My diary and my husband's journal are very different. I wrote deeply about my emotions related to relationships but not much about anything else deep. I was a teen though. His at the same age are filled with every thought in his head with analysis of subjects, emotions regarding relationships, and random stories. When we first met he had no interest in talking about the random things most NTs do. I did it to fill the uncomfortable lag in conversation. This I picked up from others because I learned what I saw. Soon I realized that it was just 'fill' and not to do it anymore. Most NTs almost exclusively talk about gossip and useless info.

It is interesting to hear the comparison between your journal and your husband's. Can I clarify; I see your husband is an undiagnosed aspie and you have aspie kids - would you say you are NT then or are you also on the spectrum? Or are you NT with a higher number of autistic traits than average, seeing as you connected with your husband despite him having no interest in talking about most things NTs do? I wonder this because until I met my boyfriend I was never able to connect with anyone properly and not get bored of them and thought I'd never find anyone who could accept all the alone time I need in a relationship. My boyfriend doesn't seem to have that many autistic traits in comparison to me, but I get on so well with him because he doesn't talk about 'typical' things, he is very unconventional, therefore all my weird habits he just embraces and doesn't try to push me to do 'normal' stuff and be 'normal'.

Regarding the journals, your husband's writing of 'every thought in his head with analysis of subjects, emotions regarding relationships, and random stories' sums up the way my journal is, past and present, although the intensity of my analysis seems to have increased as I have got older, worryingly bordering on obsession with my own thoughts, ideas, emotions, memories and certain people, which can end up feeling uncomfortable and OCD-like, so I probably need to try to reduce the analysis but I find it hard to stop the thoughts and tangents cascading onto the page.

I think our communication difficulties are not so much a result of deeper thinking, necessarily, but more a result of our tendency to say what we mean, nothing more or less, unlike NTs why, by and large, imply and hide meaning in their words and instinctually expect and assume that others are doing the same.
Couple that with our tendency towards literal interpretations of others' spech and lack of instinctual knowledge and picking up of social rules and cues, and you've got a recipie for disaster.

Fortunately, many of us are able to learn many of these social rules and conventions and develop complex script-trees to fit most situations so we can seem to carry on 'normal' conversations rather well.
Unfortunately, we'll never really be able to communicate with NTs as effectively or on the same social level as they do with each other.
I'm ok with that, though.

Ah yes, as cavernio pointed out, I did mix up two different things; I see now that seeing lots of different interpretations indeed isn't necessarily deeper thinking. Your explanation is helpful, however getting away from the example of social interaction, or regardless of whether you are socially interacting - I wonder whether aspies have a deeper level of analysis in their thought processes or whether this is just, as someone mentioned above - a 'different' way of analysing things or seeing things, rather than a deeper way?

I think the difference is the conscious vs unconscious mind. If it's automatic, does that mean it's less deep? Quite possibly, for if it's not in one's conscious mind, then is one actually thinking it, or are they just following a predetermined script?

I think I am not good at analyzing. I am too overwhelmed to analyze properly and analyzing overwhelms me even more.
This is why I feel like I don't belong here. People here write long, detailed posts that analyze situations deeply. I can't do that. If I read people's posts here and my s***ty posts I just feel really stupid compared to people here.

I think the above reflection is true. Often we Aspies forget that there are NTs with eidetic memories, NTs with filmographic thinking capabilities, NTs who are fantastic with numbers, scientific analysis, and so on.

The evident diversity of intellective processing between NTs and Aspies ought not yield a value judgment. Lest we forget, there is no evidence to make us suspect that Shakespeare, Bach, or Monet were on the spectrum, yet who could deny their depth of penetration into the human soul and the pulse of reality?

I think some autistic people will be regarded as more logical than NT people. The reason I believe is because of how an autistic brain perceives information in detail, and stores the information in detail.

I believe that the stored information is stored in an "ordered/logical expectancy patterns", and upon a future equivalent event, then the autistic person can recall that "ordered/logical expectancy pattern" and compare and contrast the stored pattern to the present event. This gives the appearance of logic.

A simple example is when I go to Subway, and about 95% of the time they ask me if I want cheese, before asking me if I want my bread toasted. When they don't follow that order, then I point it out to them, and they chuckle, and say something like, "I changed it around for you , huh".

I could go Mr. Spock on them, and say, "It is highly illogical to ask me if I want my bread toasted before asking me if I want cheese, as I may want my cheese toasted".

It is apparent logic, as a by-product of expected order.

You could be right about detailed memory retrieval.

But back to the phrase "deeper analysis"; are we even agreed on its meaning? Does analysis emphasize the ability to break a whole into its proper parts, or to synthesize parts into the most appropriate whole, or both? It is quite clear from his writings and biography that Aristotle did not have autism, yet I can't think of a greater analytic mind than Aristotle.

Not necessarily, no.
Of course, it all depends on your definition of 'deep', I suppose.

We ceratinly have a tendency to loop things over&over&over, and sometimes that can lead to insights that others might not notice.
Is that 'deep', though?
I really don't think so.

I don't really think there is anything 'deep'.
I spent two thirds of my life looking for deepness.
First in math, then in science, then in phiolosohpy, and finally in the meeting of science, math, and philosophy.

I found structure, I found understanding, I even found what I believe to be the keys to understanding and manipulating reality at its most basic level.
I never found anything I would describe as 'deep' though.

Go figure.