What is your opinion on Monotropism. How much legitimate is

Post Reply New Topic

Hello everyone,
This is my first post here. I've only recently come to realise that I am on the spectrum. Everything makes so much more sense now and thus my anxiety is greatly reduced. I came accross this Monotropism theory and it seems to make a lot more sense to me than anything I have read so far, based on my experience with autism. How much accepted it is in the psychiatric community who do research on autism? How much based is it?

Seems like little more than circular reasoning to me. "Autistic folks are autistic because they are autistic".

Seems plausible in a general sense.

It’s hyperfocus, basically.

Like Kraftie said, we have the ability to hyperfocus but it's not the ONLY thing we do. In fact, seeing the "big picture," which would be the polar opposite of monotropism, is incredibly for anyone to be able to do whether they are Autistic or NT or anything else. I am wondering whom they think actually really, truly sees the "big picture" in anything? The only difference between us and them is that we have the ability to hyperfocus and they don't. So have decided to pathologize us for that. Now, granted, there are some Autistic who truly cannot see past their own noses and they are pathologized for it. But there are plenty of neurotypical people who do the exact same thing but they will never be pathologized for it. So it there legitimacy in monotropism? Sure there is. Is it exclusive to Autistic people, no. It might be more common with Autistic people but plenty of other people do it too.

The reason it's important to understand that we are not the only ones who do this, is that when it's seen in an Autistic person, the goal becomes to correct it. If it's seen in an nt they are just considered focused or obsessed and they are sent to therapy to correct it.

If you are an nt girl and you are obsessed with makeup and clothes, that is an acceptable obsession so that's fine. If you are an nt boy and you are obsessed with football and cars, that's acceptable so that is just fine. If you are an Autistic girl and you are obsessed with trains that is a pathological issue that needs to be corrected.

It’s more a matter of “degrees,” really.

Even NTs hyperfocus—but autistic people do it more consistently and more intensely.

Monotropism
Monotropism is a theory of autism developed by autistic people, initially by Dinah Murray and Wenn Lawson. Monotropic minds tend to have their attention pulled more strongly towards a smaller number of interests at any given time, leaving fewer resources for other processes.

I just found this. Now that I understand better what monotropism actually means, I do agree with this statement. So yes, I think this is legitimate and true. When I looked at monotropism as defined outside of the context of how it works in Autism, basically, just the general definition, which was the definition I found first, it made me respond differently.

In the first definition I found, it basically just described monotropism as cognitive tunnel vision. And that is not exclusive to Autism at all. But now that I see that it is about describing brain energy resources and how they are allocated, and I understand better, I agree with the above definition.

It’s “accepted” in the “psychological community” because it is obvious.

Rather like it’s “accepted” that people with measles get rashes.

I feel like this is, at least, a fairly mainstream viewpoint.

What do you actually mean by hyperfocus?

Well... the concept of 'tropism' is borrowed from zoology and botany.

Its a heresy to think that 'dumb animals' can think, so they must have "instincts". Tropism is even lower intellectually than an 'instinct'. Even plants have 'tropisms' (like a plant in your apartment will bend its stem so its leaves face the sunlight coming through the window. That bending is a 'tropism'. Birds flying south for the winter is sometimes described as a tropism.

Humans are drawn to certain subjects of thought. Nts are drawn to practical things, or to things that will gain them social status, or mates, or money. Autistics are drawn to the thing for thing itself. I suppose that that would be the difference. Both have 'thought tropisms', but autistic thought tropisms are not as adaptive, or are maladaptive.