Article: Why Anti-Authoritarians are Diagnosed as ...

Post Reply New Topic

Discuss.

People who take too authoritarian a tone come across as bullying, and that gets my back up. When that happens I don't want anything to do with them, or with whatever they are trying to coerce me into doing, even if they are in the right about whatever it is. For some reason much of the time, I just can't stop my reaction, even now that I am in my early 50s. I really can't stand being coerced, and a strong verbal/body language tone of pushy authority puts me in resistance mode.

From what I've read about people on the spectrum this is common amongst us. My advice in dealing with kids on the spectrum is: Don't try to coerce (get pushy). Find some other way to present something that needs doing/not doing.

I think it stems from the fact many people in authority positions do not understand leadership, have no leadership skills, and are in the position simply because they were placed there as part of advancement, or because they strove for it simply to fulfill psychological gratification, not because they are suited to it. Curiously enough many of them seem to have authority issues, themselves.

This is very true, especially in the psychiatry branch, because the doctors have been studying and think they know it all. In the institutions this is mentality much worse and the patient can get in trouble easily if he gives the 'wrong' attitude to the guards/nurses.

I have issues with accepting the role these people take on, I don't feel offended, but i do feel a threat from them, because as I said, they think to know it all, and don't expect an apprentice to be more potent, smarter or knowing, and they have the power/authority to decide over the career/goals of the unequal, inferior.
but the only right strategy seems to keep them as a friend. So I don't give them a chance to treat me unfair, and if they will, I strike back twice as hard.
The philosophy I guess is; The right defense is offense, to approach the source of danger and to disfigure it.

But... I didn't have the age for this attitude so it was simple to suspend me
and after all i might have been wrong all along.

Oppositional defiant disorder they call this. I call it having a moral value about equality and not letting anyone feel themselves better or worse then others. Equal treatment in my eyes means, to fill the gaps of difference, although it doesn't necessarily have to be reciprocal.
When i think of it, it is an ability to make peace.

I often make a distinction between moral competence and moral performance. It seems intuitive that Aspies should excel at the former, as one might fully well understand social and ethical rules, but one may be incapable of acting on them as required at any given instance of social interaction. This is even more probable given that Aspies might take sociology or human psychology as a special interest (or Asperger's and the Autism Spectrum itself). The assumption here is that the discovery of social norms and ethical norms, that is, normativity, is discovered under similar causal scenarios. So, through hearing and being attentive at the right moment so as to acquire the rule, through direct method, or direct social interaction.

With this distinction we may be able to explain what it means to be a disorder. NTs seem to assume that there is a harmony between moral competence and moral performance, such that any learner upon internalizing the former intuitive grasps the conditions under which the latter should be expressed. So, for instance, the "deadpan look" of many Aspies is a criterion for judgement of performance which implies competence under that scenario (that one has internalized an ethical rule). While it may be the case that the Aspie has internalized it, a divergence exists which renders expression of it improbable (through gesticulations or facial expression). I would suppose that many Aspies can look at human pain without much grimace.

I for instance caught special footage of a Syrian boy who was shell blasted such that his entire lower half of his face and chest were completely destroyed. Yet, as the boy sat calmly on the operating table, I found myself mesmerized by his eyes and calmness. It gave me a calmness which I could not control. I felt only the imagination that my own body may be rendered destroyed in such a way, which was the thought that gave me mild nausea, however, his actual body presented to me only gave me the thought of: interesting. At the same time, I considered all of the political and warface consequences that his physical state should entail (that the U.S. should intervene, etc.). However, I am quite sure most NTs or just people in general might vomit or demand that the video be stopped. It took me very little effort to continue watching (primarily because of the principle that if I start a video which I find interesting, I should watch it 'til the end).

At the same time I understood the moral imperative at play (help these peoples enduring political strife and warfare), but I felt no performance necessary. Would this suggest that I am without heart or care? Under many circumstances, people take the lack of compunction, etc. or general expression of an ethical rule, insofar as one's physical and facial expression, as a rejection of the rule. At the same time, it seems that Aspies have a tendency, within the sphere of competence, to be incapable of prescribing ethical rules for their own case, whereas description of (comparative) ethical rules may come easily.

I believe assumptions about prescription implicates some notion or standard of authority. Chiefly, the application of internalized rules is problematic for certain ethical norms. And this seems to be the crux of the problem: an Aspie has to _apply_ a rule, whereas many NTs simply intuit it. However, perception of the structure of a rule (the bridge between competence and performance) antecedently depends on the capacity to differentiate _when_ one should describe or prescribe a rule. A tendency to describe I believe covers most Aspies which leaves the Aspie less capable of prescribing rules for their own case. The two, it seems, are mutually exclusive; so, it seems, disorder is born out of the Aspies tendency to fit others within a system while being less capable of prescribing, or fitting one's self, into that system.

So, for instance, the author makes note that at one point in his intellectual career, he was considered a good student, but under similar circumstances, but at a different and collegiate institution, he became a bad student. An Aspie might recognize this, however, might fail to apply rules accordingly for one's own case. That is to say: _these_ people are playing a different game, yet I am still a member of both games.

And Schizophrenia, my only 'crime' that got me diagnosed was leaving school one year before graduation, I had no other symptoms. Basically if you're willfully defiant it's easier for mental health professionals to convince themselves you're mentally ill rather than admit you don't like school or the capitalist system.

Did you ever encounter a situation whereas you had the possibility to help somebody out of a dangerous situation? I think you would feel the necessity to help, as opposed to where you are a spectator of a tragedy on-screen. When I see stuff alike, with innocent war-zone victims, I must say, I almost immediately forget and barely realize.
But in real life, I adequately go to the rescue if help is so needed, like this one time, when a Motorised quadricycle with an aged man inside it fell over, the man was panicking and I saw it happen, I quickly went to pull the man out and push the vehicle back on its wheels, because I was afraid it might catch on fire because it was leaking gasoline. That is consistent with:



I assume that experience will synchronize this mechanism in AS. I speak for myself here . .
Trough (attempts at) application of the self-generated theory, or acquired lesson of a socially controllable system of behaviour, in other words to put your moral competence to the test, one might be able to learn to be a bit more intuitive in varying and variable social situations as they come.
As for me, I have been put to the test, and being a good (acceptable to others, nice to be with) person has allowed me to learn these important things. But for the greatest part it is indeed a moral system at play from where I have to logically and rationally, behave or join in socially. Again, participating is the only way to see if my theories and rationally rendered empathy, are even in the close direction. But I can't be accurate always, because it is just draining my energy. But it's worth it, just like learning any new ability, I might suck at it forever, but through practice, I am able to give a pretty good impression of being a pro, and impressive to new people (although i fear new people, trust-issue).

Yeah, what I'm trying to say, is that with meeting new people, socializing isn't easier and will not ever be easy, but it Will be easier, in relation to the people I've bonded with before as to the possible new acquaintance, is to figure out what their individual social needs are. Anything familiar will be recognized from earlier (successful) conventions and the rest will be figurative. but rarely, this unknown undiscovered field, can be somewhat predicted in size/shape, patterns of behavior, social urges, by extrapolating from what i already know.. . . and thus, creating a very own TOM ?


I don't know. I absolutely can't handle mistreated animals, and anything in my knowledge will get me very upset, albeit a beaten cow in India on TV, you know, not my cup of tea. Being close to any kind of mistreat/bullying will get me a little upset, even misjudgment in social conventions or bias will annoy me. But a wounded person does nothing for me, I only wanna know what's the cause, possibly help if there isn't any yet and only if i know what to do, but mostly, i don't wanna have anything to do with it. Hearing a wail about the conditions or yelling out in pain, however, does affect me, as it becomes very clear how they react physiologically to the injury.
Sometimes if it grinds my gears, i would want to study the anatomy of the injured parts later, just to learn more about what i saw.
Very interesting piece here, i gets me on inspiring things :p

But Isn't this off-topic?

I agree, They are in it for the money and that's why the worlds out of control with corruption all over the world.

Interesting. I think anti authoritan people are everywhere, some in powerful positions.

With regard to psychiatrists, I think they know their discipline is unscientific and that the patient is often smarter than they are. They can only tick their boxes and slot patients into whatever group the current consensus dictates.