DeusMechanicus wrote:
This is an interesting topic and I have read few responses which are not subjective or simply emotional in origin.
It is not unusual (although it is not widely acceptable) for individuals with ASD to feel ‘superior’ at times. This may derive from the individual believing that they have been chastised or unappreciated for being very capable in a specific field. The result is to conclude that other’s are not capable of appreciating the Aspies contributions or ability and are therefore ‘less able’ or ‘less informed’. This is a very logical and linear method of thinking and should be tolerated and analysed, not attacked.
This is not a question of arrogance, although it is typical for the non-astute observer to assert this view and it is not an expression of self-confidence; and rather than a malignant narcissism, it is a reactive defensive mechanism designed to probe the social constructs of others by inducing a pre-determined response.
Most Aspies realize that people react emotionally and therefore, if isolated, intend to create and recreate these emotions in order to consider them ‘in situ’. Most of the time, the subject is not aware of this (which would compromise the integrity of the evaluation) and responds in a way that leads the Aspie to regard such individuals as rather like lab-rats.
It is because many Aspies feel that they cannot participate adequately in social situations that they must instead observe in order to learn. This observation then develops into probing, a system whereby the Aspie becomes partially involved but not fully-immersed in social interaction in order to determine the social psychology of others. Often this involves inducing responses which are emotional, since it is the human emotional response which is so peculiar and enigmatic.
The concept that all people are equal is a preferred sentiment but people are not all equal; we know this to be the case because there is so much diversity. This diversity presents differential rates of success (on many levels). It is useful to move towards a fairer society but the expectation that all individuals have the same to offer in various ways is a misjudgement founded within 19th century (specifically Victorian) idealistic tendencies. Some people are not useful for some situations and some are not useful for most situations etc...it is the level of applicable usefulness that determines value – existence is not a right in itself but a privilege and a virtue that the conscious being must assert and defend of himself. Perhaps it would be useful to understand that individuals are not of the same value but they are of the same worth.
It is more efficient to be methodological rather than ideological, although ideology does serve a social function.
With regards to IQ, it is a preliminary test for intelligence and by no means representative of potential or all-round ability. It is more useful to refer to Gardener’s intelligences which is qualititative rather than quantitative.
The individual who began this topic discussion requires guidance and seems emotionally perturbed. It is not useful to continue to perturb them. If pragmatic discussion cannot be continued it is better [more productive] to give no response than to indicate displeasure without rational and concise justification.
That's a generous analysis. More generous than me anyway, in accepting the post at face value rather than as a troll playing at Aspergers based on something he read. So I'll play along too. If the OP is posting for real and not a troll, this is a helpful analysis that shows a good explanation for what's going on in his head. The problem remains (if the OP is for real) that no women are going to be attracted to a man who considers them to be inferior. He has to find a way to change that way of thinking or women will just continue to have a "yea, well f$%^ you too" attitude towards him. If his anecdotes are true, women are repelled with good reason.
14 Feb 2011, 2:47 pm
