Page 1 of 3 [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,812
Location: California Bay Area

14 Apr 2015, 1:20 am

I have had at least one or two interests that I was unable to continue: computer programming and mathematical logic. With computer programming, I think I just don't have the best learning style (I learn best when the logic of things is explained); I did well in my programming courses, but it seems like courses and textbooks stop WAY short of what a person needs to know to program something useful. Based on reading stuff programmers have written, it seems like most of them became real programmers in a non-sequential way, like just being very curious, trying out stuff and actually remembering the results of their trial-and-error (which is difficult for me; I forget what I've tried and try the same thing multiple times), and reading and modifying other people's code. That seems like a chaotic way to learn to me; I like step-by-step learning that builds on previous knowledge. The sequential pattern of learning is how I remember what I've learned when there are a lot of discrete concepts; I string all the information together linearly.

I developed an interest in mathematical logic outside of school, so I've never taken any classes, just taught myself via old textbooks from amazon. It started off easy, then I just couldn't follow the proofs anymore (ironically, I decided to study mathematical logic so that I would be able to read and write mathematical proofs; but I apparently need the same skill set to make it through mathematical logic proofs). They require so many steps, many of them implicit (and it takes forever to figure them out), and I don't have the working memory to follow. By the time I get halfway through the proof, I've forgotten the first part, so the rest doesn't make sense. Even if I write down the steps (which takes forever), looking at them all at once, I can't see the forest for the trees; I see a bunch of individual pieces instead of one whole proof.



Evam
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2015
Posts: 309

14 Apr 2015, 7:19 am

1. It is only partly a cognitive problem (a rigid thinking problem). Some people on the autism spectrum that have the right mixture out of hyperfocus and disparate attention, can indeed be very creative thinkers (the genius), but even they suffer from thinking too rigidly at certain moments, and being too "wandering" at other moments.

2. It is also a teamwork problem. Sometimes you need the input from someone else, in particular if you get stuck with one problem. People have the concept that in IT, and even more so in mathematics and natural sciences there are a lot of lone achievers. But Alfred Einstein for example developped his big ideas while he was in a very active discussion group plus in a relationship with someone who shared his same theoretical interests and with whom he could discuss his theory apparently even more thoroughly; in the letters to his first wife in the so called "miraculous year" he often speaks of "our theory" and "our work on the relativity movement" and so on, with "our" meaning "himself and her", and even if she says " we are but one stone" (apparently with regard to her participation in his thinking), it is difference that boosts creativity. Most big oeuvres are actually collective works to a high degree (John Stuart Mill, Goethe, "The Dream of the Red Chamber", Freud, Shakespeare and Tolstoi), and I am sure that this is true for humanities and sciences to the same degree.

3. Then it is probably also a motivational problem. In particular people that have some alexithymia issue (so who have trouble to recognize their own emotional state) tend to be less aware of their lack of motivation / their having an aversion against what they are doing. BTW this is a big factor in developping a depression, to always force yourself to continue doing something that you actually dont want to do.

NTs are usually not good for any difficult mathematical problems. Partly it is simply because we are more people-centered than object-centered. But that is not the whole story. Me for example, I have theoretically the cognitive capacity to understand a more complicated mathematical problems, and as I had to make a presentation on Krugman s article on exchange rate bands, there was also some "motivation" to try to get the quite challenging mathematical part, too. But as practically, the verbal explanation of why an exchange rate bandwidth has a stabilizing effect on the exchange rate system, is already quite satisfying, and the geometric explanation is quite illustrative even for a bad visual thinker than me, and far superior to the mathematical proof for its simplicity and because the mathematical proof needs an additional stupid assumption (random walk changes of expectations about exchange rates) in order to do the calculation, I have a strong aversion in following the quite complicated "normal rules of stochastic calculus". Plus I have an even stronger aversion against mathematical modelling in economic theory in general, because it does not render justice to as complex behaviors as are peoples economic behaviors (I did not know at that time yet that Adam Smith and many other economists were on the autism spectrum, but I did knew that these people lack the understanding for the complexity of people s economic behavior.) I can see my strong inner aversion, and would therefore not be sad about being reluctant and therefore unable and in a certain way "too stupid" to do the calculations. I considered it as a good excuse. And - now comes the more important point - even if I dont see the reason very well, or at all, but just feel the strong aversion itself, I would assume that the aversion has a reason of its own, and take it seriously. This assumption comes from a very strong previous knowledge from my very NT world experience that there definitely must be some reason for an aversion: I can usually see the reasons for an aversion most of the time either clearly or at least approximately, and I have enough experience that many times that I was not able to understand this aversion at first, I got to understand the reasons better, much better or even completely later on. So if I am unable to go on with something, I would watch out for the aversion, and to what it is linked, and then search for the reason of this aversion. I also know that the stronger the aversion the better the chance for it having a serious reason.

One reason for how some people get in general more highly motivated than others, and acquire an obsession, is elucidated in "The Chess Story" by Stefan Zweig, a very insightful little tale.



dryope
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 281
Location: head in a book

14 Apr 2015, 10:15 am

I've failed at writing a decent undergraduate and masters thesis in my fired -- I squeaked by both times -- and am failing at my Dissertation. I can write essays fine, but the big projects...I don't know. I get anxious. I can't understand how the pieces fit together. I do too much work and then it's shallow garbage. I don't understand what's happening.

I think it's an executive function thing, maybe? The weird thing is, I am very good at organizing my research, tracking down sources, getting lots of great notes, and organizing them into an outline. And I mention I teach writing professionally? Yet I can't write anything longer than ten pages that's actually at my level.

I tried hiring a professional dissertation coach. I tried talking to the writing center at my school. I've read a large selection of books on all this. And yet I just can't do it.


_________________
Diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder 19 June 2015.


Girlwithaspergers
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2012
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,320
Location: USA

14 Apr 2015, 12:23 pm

I used to be very interested in science and being a doctor but did awful on AP bio exam. I feel ya.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

14 Apr 2015, 12:31 pm

Depending on how detail oriented you are, you might try learning Assembly Language. While you may never use it for much down the road, knowing it will likely give you better insight into the operating systems and into other languages.

As for mathematical proofs, that is very difficult to learn on your own. Without some kind of knowledgeable person looking at your work, you really aren't going to know if your proofs are at all valid. It is very easy for even the most expert mathematicians to overlook small issues with a proof. For example, Andrew Wiles' original proof of Fermat's Last Theorem had an error that took a year to correct.



Evam
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2015
Posts: 309

14 Apr 2015, 1:19 pm

dryope wrote:
I've failed at writing a decent undergraduate and masters thesis in my fired -- I squeaked by both times -- and am failing at my Dissertation. I can write essays fine, but the big projects...I don't know. I get anxious. I can't understand how the pieces fit together. I do too much work and then it's shallow garbage.


Oh, but most decent people have that problem, NT or not. For a project to be interesting it needs to be a bigger challenge with real questions, and that means nearly inevitably bigger trouble with finishing it. I am rather worried about people that manage to write their thesis on time. There must be something wrong with them. 8O At best they have something like a "furor poeticus" which is beyond us normal and less troubled folks.

Cooperating with someone else, taking a small project out of the big project for the moment, letting the subject lying there for some years (as many writers do it for some of their dearest subjects) and starting something else. Things will clear over time and decennies, a bit at least. The problem is only that the concept of a thesis or dissertation is quite inconsiderate about this creative process, but that s not our fault.

If you want to finish not "it", but at least hand in something, you should look for a discussion partner. What is your dissertation about?



milksnake
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2015
Age: 40
Posts: 150
Location: outer space

14 Apr 2015, 2:05 pm

You don't seem stupid, trying to do proofs in your head is really hard to do and programming languages seem to be half finished messes to me, really annoying to learn.

To be honest maths makes everyone feel stupid. At no point whilst I was studying did i think to myself, 'this is getting easier, I really know what I'm doing'. As soon as you begin to understand one topic you get hit with another even harder one and spend the whole time confused and thinking you suck at it, it's only when you look back you realize just how far you've come.

With proofs, you really do need to write them out, I don't think there are many people out there who can do them in their heads (at least not the more complex ones). One thing that helped for me was to write out the first step on a separate piece of paper to remind myself and to break the proof down into sections so I don't have to remember too much at once. I also found that leaving loads of space between equations stops it turning into a sea of letters. When you get lost, go back to the start and talk yourself through it so far.



starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,812
Location: California Bay Area

14 Apr 2015, 7:01 pm

I'm not even really doing proofs yet. With mathematical logic, I'm just reading the textbook and trying to follow the author's proofs, but they are unholy long and involved.



dryope
Toucan
Toucan

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jan 2015
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 281
Location: head in a book

14 Apr 2015, 8:53 pm

Oops, I'm hijacking this thread. Sorry, not intentional. I think the Venn diagram of my experience and the OP's may be enough: basically, struggling with roadblocks and trying to determine if they are inborn limitations or just an unusual learning style. And thanks so much for the response.

My dissertation is on WWII-era Chinese monks and their participation in fighting in the Sino-Japanese War. I read Chinese and have advanced degrees up the wazoo. I know NTs have this problem, too, which is why I've tackled it head-on. While I've thrown myself into this with the same systematizing skills I did for learning Chinese and the same writing skills I have used my whole life -- and sought out classes and mentors -- I have failed utterly. While my classmates have all gone on to write very well.

My skills do not transfer over to writing long-form, full stop. I can only write one way at a time, and since I write for a company for a living, I can only write THAT way (short and focused). I think I would need to quit my job and spend another five years learning long-form writing to learn how to do a dissertation.

When I say my long-form writing is bad, I'm not exaggerating. This is my opinion but also many, many other people's, like my professors, who are always surprised by the sudden drop in quality for my long-form work. My whole college life.

I just lose my ability to connect the parts to the whole effectively. I end up doing it in the end, but only if I write truly banal, undergraduate-level crap. I know where I'm going wrong and I know what I should do instead, but my mind just freezes up. I get so anxious -- I think because my brain has trouble communicating across itself to this extent -- that the whole thing just shuts down, when it comes to generalizing and connecting. And yet I know what I want to say. It's maddening.

Seriously, I could teach a class on writing a dissertation. I just can't do it myself. Frowny face.


_________________
Diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder 19 June 2015.


beneficii
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 May 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,245

17 Apr 2015, 6:47 pm

eric76 wrote:
Depending on how detail oriented you are, you might try learning Assembly Language. While you may never use it for much down the road, knowing it will likely give you better insight into the operating systems and into other languages.

As for mathematical proofs, that is very difficult to learn on your own. Without some kind of knowledgeable person looking at your work, you really aren't going to know if your proofs are at all valid. It is very easy for even the most expert mathematicians to overlook small issues with a proof. For example, Andrew Wiles' original proof of Fermat's Last Theorem had an error that took a year to correct.


I have a lot of experience with 6502 assembly, which I used to make one NES game of my own, to hack SMB3 and to do my long-unfinished project of disassembling SMB2J (called "Lost Levels" in the American version of All-Stars). I had a lot of success of hacking SMB3, including hacking to make it where you can start on a different screen from 0 and a different y value from $20 (dollar sign means hexadecimal). It was actually somewhat involved, as I had to deal with a lot of hard-wiring in the code, but it was rewarding. I think my experience with 6502 assembly helped my "a" game with C++.

I've also done proofs, which I thought were interesting. I thought up a few on my own that mainly dealt with combinations and series (and some innovations on the summation sign). But you're right, it can be hard to think up how to do a proof. Nevertheless, reading a bunch of other proofs on similar topics beforehand and following them helped with the few I thought up on my own.


_________________
"You have a responsibility to consider all sides of a problem and a responsibility to make a judgment and a responsibility to care for all involved." --Ian Danskin


guzzle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Sep 2013
Age: 59
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,298
Location: Close To The Border

17 Apr 2015, 6:51 pm

Been told by various shrinks I'm too smart for my own good. Never was sure whether to take it as an insult or compliment.
Maths is beyond me though. Too abstract.



Evam
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2015
Posts: 309

18 Apr 2015, 3:16 am

dryope wrote:
My dissertation is on WWII-era Chinese monks and their participation in fighting in the Sino-Japanese War. I read Chinese and have advanced degrees up the wazoo.


Interesting subject. I was living in China for some time, and am working for and with Chinese for more than ten years. I am interested in Chinese history, and a little bit interested in buddhism and taoism, too. Unfortunately I did not manage to learn Chinese. But if I dont need to read Chinese texts, you might have found someone who can help you a bit with going on. I am sometimes bad at finishing my own stuff, but very good at what you call "connecting the parts to the whole effectively".

Are you able to say which 1 to 3 points distinguishes the Chinese monks fighting from other people s fighting and which 1 to 3 points make your diss different from other literature (which?) about the Sino-Japenese war/Chinese monks participation in it? You can also send me a message directly, if you want. Do you have one or two particularly interesting source or reference texts in English that you could mail me, or something where you tried to summarize one aspect?



btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

18 Apr 2015, 11:58 pm

I like understanding physical systems in terms of applied math a lot more than pure math proofs.
Are you interested in physics?
For programming, it seems true that most programmers use non-sequential, trial-and-error approaches.
I definitely use that approach.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


starkid
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,812
Location: California Bay Area

19 Apr 2015, 12:06 am

btbnnyr wrote:
Are you interested in physics?

I used to be. My undergraduate degree was in Physics. Eventually, I got sick of it because I couldn't make any sense of it. Too many metaphors and "ideal" abstractions (such as infinite fields of charge, perfect reflectors, etc), not enough concrete concepts that were directly from nature. I wanted to learn how the natural world works, not learn about imaginary constructs.

Quote:
For programming, it seems true that most programmers use non-sequential, trial-and-error approaches.
I definitely use that approach.

Can you give some examples?



btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

19 Apr 2015, 12:20 am

I'm not sure if I have makesensical eggsamples.
It seems like I just want to do some task through code, then I code it, and it usually works after I get some code errors that I fix until it works.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


Evam
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2015
Posts: 309

19 Apr 2015, 2:58 am

starkid wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Are you interested in physics?

I used to be. My undergraduate degree was in Physics. Eventually, I got sick of it because I couldn't make any sense of it. Too many metaphors and "ideal" abstractions (such as infinite fields of charge, perfect reflectors, etc), not enough concrete concepts that were directly from nature. I wanted to learn how the natural world works, not learn about imaginary constructs.

Quote:
For programming, it seems true that most programmers use non-sequential, trial-and-error approaches.
I definitely use that approach.

Can you give some examples?


If you are interested in real world physics, I would try with mechanical engineering and some concepts where people try to imitate nature like for example how a gecko manages to climb a vertical or even overhanging wall. Or why combustion in a power station does not go as the engineers had foreseen it. This more experimental approach might be a more rewarding field for you. Real world physics is more about weighing different abstract concepts against each other in order to get closest to what is actually happening.

But again, as for IT: cooperating with others helps a lot, and is really the clue.

Couldnt anyone recommend some websites where programmers exchange ideas when they get stuck with an IT problem? There must be many! It looks like as if you are not using any, or do you?