"more rote than meaning "

Post Reply New Topic

Just read in another thread that this is part of Gillberg's criteria for diagnosis - this is supposedly what our obsessions/interests are like. The stereotype of Aspergers seems to be that we memorise a lot of data about things but somehow fail to properly get to grips with them.

This is a quote from our much debated wikipedia article:

'Individuals with AS may collect volumes of detailed information on a relatively narrow topic such as dinosaurs or deep fat fryers, without necessarily having genuine understanding of the broader topic.[1][3] For example, a child might memorize camera model numbers while caring little about photography'

First thing to point out is that I am not diagnosed. I am in the process of being diagnosed, and my shrink has says she thinks I probably have it, but I am not formally diagnosed.

Now, I don't think this ncessarily describes the way that I obsess.

One of my big things has always been newspapers and magazines. I keep stacks of them and know all the journalists names. But I do not just memorise this information - I'm very interested in styles of journalism, what is and isn't good writing, and I do write myself too. I am also genuinely interested in the content of the articles and the issues under discussion.

So, do you think that this description of Aspie interests is correct? Does it ring true for you?

It's certainly not true for me. While I have certain interests that I can become obsessive about and gain a great deal of knowledge about, I'm actually pretty terrible at rote memorization. I have a knack for recognizing patterns and for problem-solving, but I can't remember names, numbers, or figures to save my life.

I've noticed there seems to be a certain reluctance to admit that aspies or autistics are good at anything useful. I certainly am not limited in deeper conceptual understanding. For years, it was said that we can memorize stuff but are incapable of actually understanding much and lacked the capacity for complex reasoning. However, a recent Japanese study suggested that aspies have higher fluid intelligence, and other studies have shown that autistics tend to perform better on intelligence tests that focus on abstract reasoning. But still, there is a general reluctance to acknowledge that we ARE capable of making real contributions, and that we are intelligent.
Actually, I think the maintenance of Asperger's as a separate diagnosis from autism may be a reflection of this reluctance. Autistics are generally perceived as mentally ret*d, so when someone comes along who displays many of the characteristics of autism but is obviously intelligent, doctors may sometimes be unwilling to reject their old notions and diagnose it as autism.

What total bullcrap. I have a strong urge to understand the thing I'm interested in, not just memorize the stuff as rote trivia. I'm sick of dehumanizing BS like this that makes people think we are robots.

I remember things best if I UNDERSTAND them! probably 90%+ of my memory is driven by logic! I didn't bother to remember how to diagram an osscilator, for example, but NEVER had a problem doing so! WHY? I know how and why it works, and what must happen. I draw based on that!

I believe I have AS, and learn some things by rote, but almost everything is UNDERSTOOD! I doubt ANYONE can tell me why "why?" means "For what reason is whatever true?"! I only know it does... SO, I guess NOBODY understands everything!

I've had a lot of things "more rote than meaning", like, say, language-echolalia with severe receptive language problems. But not my special interests. Those were never more rote than meaning.

I wonder if it's our liking for routine that gives what so far seems to be a wrong impression.

In my day job, I work in a cash office processing money and reconciling tills. I do everything in almost exactly the same order each day, and become distressed if I am not able to. I can see why this would give someone the impression that I had only learnt the procedures by rote - if I had a deeper understanding, why would I not mind switching the order around a bit?

Of course, my preference for keeping to a routine has a totally separate cause. It helps me avoid sensory overload if I do not experience things which are unexpected. I also find I can do things more accurately if I have a routine for doing them, (accuracy is obviously very important in my job), and I think everyone finds this, I don't think that's an aspie thing at all. I am actually incapable of doing any math/logic tasks without proper understanding of the principles involved, and I perfectly understand the principles of how money flows around our building.

But I can see why to someone else, my chosen methodology would make me look like a machine.

Sorry to deviate from the original topic of interests/obsessions, this was just the best example I could think of to illustrate my point.

I think it's some of our lack of expression when we say things, and not answering other people's questions in what they believe is a proper manner.

Not so sure about the theory.

Who gets to decide what is meaningful? My obsession of programming is pretty meaningful. On the other hand it took a couple of years for my duck obsession to warm up, before I started looking info on ducks around the world. I just liked the look of ducks and still do. Who's to say that isn't meaningful? Subjective maybe. I'm genuinely interested in nature so the fact I'm drawn to particular animal compels my search for knowledge. It is not at the exclusion of other animals either. I’m very much lateral. I see a titbit that sounds interesting I will go off and find out about it. My recall on demand is very poor, but I recall random facts. In that respect my interests are very broad indeed, but I like to seek out the details that interest me. Why learn about Western Sahara? Who knows? Aren't you draw to something because it stimulates something in your brain? In which case you can't assume much reason for that other than biological, what comes after that is another story.

Last edited by 0_equals_true on 15 Jan 2008, 6:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I have a database of what is true to me. anything that fits, I remember forever, what has no meaning, a phone number, name, face, is never filed.

Most of my bad times have been from people trying to get me to learn things, that they could not explain.

We are judged by other's sense of importance.

I find this is why there is so little on adult outcomes. We file away more, and use it later.

We are real, Psychology is junk science.

To drug, electro shock, and enslave people, you must believe you are superior.

That just reeks of people trying to perpetuate the idea that we're a bunch of mentally ret*d sub-humans with no idea of what's going on. It makes it easier for them to try and medicate us and lock us up and generally make life more difficult...

Maybe I'm just cynical.

Certainly doesn't describe me, I want to learn learn learn and understand EVERYTHING. I'm autistic, not an idiot.

That's not how I obsess either. I actually don't care very much about memorizing facts; I just want to immerse myself in information about whatever I'm obsessed with as much as possible.

With me, the memorization is secondary to going through the actual motions of the obsession. If I watch a TV show over and over, I'm going to notice the names in the credits, and over time I'll remember them. I'm not sitting down with flashcards or anything.

Lists are another matter altogether. I'll make lists of CS players to calm down if I'm flustered, and that's both rote and meaningful.

YEAH, Tell me about it! When I start to spit out fact after fact after fact, and people think "WOW, You have a GREAT memory, How did you learn all that?", I guess some people would like to think it is just meaningless dreck.

I had ENOUGH trouble when I was a kid, and people thought I was wrong simply because I was a kid. Imagine if I was diagnosed as autistic, and they thought all this!

I don't consider my interests coming merely from rote memory. I have loved animals, particularly cats, since I was a little girl.

It's probably perception of what defines knowledge, an individual who likes...anti-tank weapons for example, a certain type of, will memorize all its details, facts, employment envelope, its uses throughout the years, its effects on target in combat situations, its mechanical reason for existing; said individual will refrain from looking at the moral reasons for why it exists, the historical events that led up to its use in the recorded situations.

"Narrow" rather than broad.

I can spout facts all day, but those facts are all I know.