Page 7 of 14 [ 220 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 14  Next

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

10 May 2012, 7:09 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
If this clearify a bit I'll use this example to show my position. It's a broad image of how I percive the differences in NTs and spectrumites:

Someone suddenly realise that he/she has not watered his/her (from now on it's a he, less letters) flowers, here there's a fundamental difference in the approach.

Logical: Go and check if they seems dehydrated, if not, no water. (Base: Facts, they did not appear to need water.)
Rational: Fill up water and water them a bit, just in case. (Base: Emotion, consern they might need water.)

(And just for the fun of it.)
Irrational: Break into the neighbours appartment and starts watering their flowers.
Illogical: Starts licking the wall.


An observation that a plant does not need water based on the observation that the plant is not dehydrated is not logic based on fact, it is logic based on speculation.

The understood logical way, based on fact, to determine if a plant needs water is by testing the soil to see if it is moist or dry. By the time a plant is dehydrated it is stressed and potentially subject to die.

That is an easy fact to evidence.

http://voices.yahoo.com/a-beginners-garden-five-favorite-annual-flowers-5159485.html

Quote:
• Water your flowers whenever the top of the soil becomes dry. Don't wait until the plants wilt. If they wilt, they are already dehydrated and stressed.


When one realizes they haven't watered the plants the base emotion of concern is what motivates action. If one is not concerned about the plants, the plants have a much better chance of not surviving.

When one gets to their plants they can either base their logic on speculation in the proper way to take care of a plant, or become properly educated on the process, and base logic on facts.

Not checking the soil is not a logical choice based on evidenced fact nor is waiting to observe the plant under stress a logical choice based on evidenced fact, in a decision to water the plant. Particularly when it is so easy to use google in determing what the facts are in relationship to a logical choice in watering one's plant.

Both choices can be perceived as rational or logical, by the individual who make the choice, depending on perception and available knowledge. However, if someone with an understanding of the facts observes the behavior, it is not likely considered the most logical choice per the facts as they exist.

Logic and rationality are highly subjective and are not necessarily perceived the same by any two individuals.

For example, licking the walls is a sign of a disorder called pica, it can either be of psychiatric origin, per mineral deficiency, or a child copying the behavior of a family pet.

If a child does it, it is not necessarily an irrational behavior. However if one did not understand the knowledge that underlies the condition of pica, one might come to the conclusion that their child's choice in licking the wall is illogical and/or irrational, instead of a result of mineral deficiency or modeling a family pet's behavior.

Breaking into someone's apartment just to water their plants, is neither logical or rational per the basis of the punishment of going to jail, as well as the fact that it is not a cultural norm.

But, for someone who puts their freedom and concern for social norms, below their concern for the plants they may see it as a rational and logical decision. Likely considered strange, irrational or illogical to an observer, but not necessarily strange, illogical, or irrational to the individual with the emotional concern.

They could be potentially extremely upset that the neighbor doesn't take care of their plants, it's quite a step up in empathy for living things like animals and children, however some people get upset, when people don't wash their cars.

It's all a matter of perspective in the decisions people make, and what may be perceived as logical or rational outcomes, are highly influenced per an individuals subjective perception, per experience, knowledge, and inherent factors that impact emotion and empathy. It is safe to say that most people would consider it an irrational and illogical action because it is not part of acceptable cultural norms, and can result in jail time.

This is similar to how things work in the real world of social communication; if one neither has the inherent propensity, or the knowledge to make a logical decision in interacting with others based on cultural norms, those interactions are often not viewed as logical, and at times are possibly viewed as irrational.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 May 2012, 7:14 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
you must agree that most of the time autistics are generaly more rational in there way of thinking


I don't agree.


_________________
We won't go back.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2011
Age: 62
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,447

10 May 2012, 7:20 pm

Neurotypicals can only be persuaded by logic if everyone else jumps on the bandwagon.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 May 2012, 7:21 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
Neurotypicals can only be persuaded by logic if everyone else jumps on the bandwagon.


I disagree with this on account of it likely not being true of all neurotypicals, just like the opposite would not be true of all autistics.


_________________
We won't go back.


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,110
Location: Left WP forever

10 May 2012, 7:22 pm

@aghogday
you present very well that autistics are rational thinkers just by the way you post
for instance your arguements are based on evidence and facts typicaly coming from wikipedia.when people disagree with you present a link that suports your claim and refutes the others claim.your posts are long and contain many facts that you use to present your arguement.you dont show much emotion when discussing things even when others are rude.neurotypicals on the other put more emphasis on emotion,neurotypical respect self confidence and will believe who ever sounds like they know what there talking about.who ever has the most self confidence when they speak is who neurotypicals will believe regardless of what evidence is presented.talk loud and have much confidence and neurotypicals will believe anything you say.
you saying that autistics are not more rational then neurotypical is like the" pot not calling the kettle black" to use an old expression.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Silvervarg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 787
Location: Sweden

10 May 2012, 7:34 pm

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Many others in the discussion have soundly refuted your statement as well.

By "many others" you mean Sweetleaf...

Wait I'm the only one here who has problems functioning? I think they did actually mean many people as there are quite a few who have similar struggles....I mean I know you think you're all logic but I think that's been disproven. For one trying to talk down to people on a forum for disagreeing with you is not really a move based on logic.

...

aghogday wrote:
Social skills have a greater impact on quality of life for people on the autism spectrum than do any specific diagnoses. Contrary to popular assumption, people diagnosed with so-called mild forms of autism don’t fare any better in life than those with severe forms of the disorder. That’s the conclusion of a new study that suggests that even individuals with normal intelligence and language abilities struggle to fit into society because of their social and communication problems.

This is so obviously not true it's unbelivable you even posted the crap here.
And to be very picky, this thread, and thus my first statement was about Aspies.

Quote:
Those are your statements above that I was responding to; my response on fear and avoidance was in agreement that it can play a part in limiting social communication, but it is not necessarily predictive of whether or not someone is more logical than someone else. Some are rarely afraid to make responses in social communication, regardless if the responses are accepted as logical social ones or not.

Yes, and that's the beuty of statistics, these "some" will always be a minority. What is more likley to occur, occurs generaly more often than something less likely. That is undisputable.

Quote:
I have provided the broad perspective of the impact of autism spectrum disorders, that provide evidence without a shadow of a doubt that the majority of individuals diagnosed do not have the ability to make the logical decisions in life, required to gain independence in life. There are millions of individuals evidenced in the world that experience autism spectrum disorders as a disabling disorder.

And you made a whopsie again. Logic has no goal, it can't be judged by a persons "quailty of life", because these are fabricated by our culture. Logic is a way of thinking and a tool for problem solving, nothing els.

vermontsavant wrote:
you must agree that most of the time autistics are generaly more rational in there way of thinking

No, he seems to ignore everything implying it, so i guess he doesn't.


_________________
Sing songs. Songs sung. Samsung.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

10 May 2012, 8:29 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Post

Swing and a miss.

Quote:
The information from Wiki and from the article about psychopaths, are far from the many disabling impacts of autism that have been evidenced by third party evidence by myself and others throughout the full course of this thread.

Why do you keep bringing this up?
And that's "other", since it's still only one, who simply posted the criteria for the diagnosis.



Quote:
Even the ability to solve math problems is dependent on the emotional process of the intrinsic reward of dopamine that provides one pleasure as they arrive at solutions to problems.

You do realise that you just said that people who do not get a kick out of it (no matter how small) can do math, right?



Quote:
There is no escaping emotion in the decision making process. For an individual that spends their entire day solving math problems, they may arrive at more logical conclusions at the end of the day, than someone that is digging ditches; it is dependent upon the individual, innate factors, experience, and environment. An individual that might not have the innate, environmental, or experience to solve math problems would likely have a deficiency in providing correct logical mathematic solutions, and an individual that does not have the same social/communication skills, will likely have a deficiency in providing logical answers to social issues, per difficulties with social skills/communication skills.

And basic statistics says that people inclined towards logical decisions will end up making more logical decision, than someone who isn't. It's very simple, if something is more likely to occure, it will generaly occure more often. That is why it's easier (a.i statisticly more likely) to hit 7 with two regular dice, than 2 or 12, and much easier than hitting 0 or 14.

Quote:
If a person does not say a thing all day long except for the sky is blue, because it is the only answer in social communication that they are sure that is based on reason, per their ability to answer a question, it doesn't provide an advantage in the skills necessary to engage in social communication that lead to logical outcomes, nor does it make the person a more logical individual.

Failed example, specific conditioned agruments cannot be held against a general conditioned argument unless it disproves the base of the argument. Yours do not.

As I've stated before, lack of evidence is not an evidence to the contrary.

Quote:
Fear is obviously a major associated emotion, involved in inhibiting social communication, but fear of being able to provide logical outcomes in social communication, due to inherent, experiential, or environmental factors, is obviously not an advantage in providing logical outcomes in communication, instead it is an impairment in social communication that is evidenced to result in disability in autism, per the criteria that measures and provides diagnoses for autism spectrum disorders.

Are you implying that most uncommunicative people on the autistic spectrum is this because they fear the responce? If you do, I want to know where the heck you got that from, and if you don't... then I have no clue what you're trying to say.

Quote:
Can you see why from the broad perspective of autism spectrum disorders, that any advantage one might have in logic per solving math problems, creating computer programs, or providing facts only in conversation, pales in comparison to the many evidenced actual disabling factors associated with autism spectrum disorders.

Did I miss the post that made this thread a contest in irrelevant statements?


Quote:
By "many others" you mean Sweetleaf...


I responded to this statement you made by providing a comprehensive list of the real disabling aspects of autism that are evidenced by third party sources, and by others in this thread. I provided most of the third party evidence on Autism as a disabling condition as provided summarized in my previous post. One individual provided third party evidence on the diagnostic criteria that provide specific impairments that are the source of disability in autism, and Janissy provided evidence that emotions are involved in 90 percent of decisions that human beings make.

And, while you have provided only anecdotal evidence for your claim, there are many others in this thread that have provided their own anecdotal evidence for the other reasons that their autism spectrum disorders are disabling in their lives that have nothing to do with advantages in making logical decisions. Your anecdotal evidence of how you see things in your own life carries no more weight in evidence than their anecdotal evidence of how they see things in their life, per the disabilities associated with autism spectrum disorders.

I stated the ability to solve problems with math are dependent on inherent, environmental, and experential factors. The ability to solve math problems is in part dependent on inherent factors, which include the emotional process which occurs automatically in the limbic system, providing the neurochemical dopamine that provides the ability for individuals to problem solve, including mathematical problems and social problems. Dopamine provides a reward in the pleasure Center of the brain, no matter how small, in providing motivation to arrive at solutions to problems in life. And research provides evidence that increases in the neurochemical of dopamine provide greater incentives for individuals to complete math problems.

ADHD symptoms are clinically recognized as co-morbid symptoms associated with autism spectrum disorders, so there is a direct relationship, in the problems that some have in staying motivated to gain logical outcomes in math problems. Dopamine provides the motivation to complete any task in life, including movement. Humans are dependent upon the limbic system and emotions for survival.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15229048

Quote:
CONCLUSIONS: The significant association between methylphenidate-induced dopamine increases and the interest and motivation for the task confirms the prediction that methylphenidate enhances the saliency of an event by increasing dopamine. The enhanced interest for the task could increase attention and improve performance and could be one of the mechanisms underlying methylphenidate's therapeutic effects. These findings support educational strategies that make schoolwork more interesting as nonpharmacological interventions to treat ADHD.


While there are people who are more inclined to make perceived logical based decisions, there are no statistics that individuals with autism are more inclined to make logical based decisions on average.

Some do make very good logically based decisions, however there is evidence to the contrary that as a group individuals with ASD's make more logical based decisions on average than the general population that are not diagnosed with a disorder that inherently limits brain function.

http://psychcentral.com/disorders/autism.htm

Quote:
The majority of adults with autism need lifelong training, ongoing supervision, and reinforcement of skills. The public schools' responsibility for providing these services ends when the person is past school age. As the child becomes a young adult, the family is faced with the challenge of creating a home-based plan or selecting a program or facility that can offer such services.

In some cases, adults with autism can continue to live at home, provided someone is there to supervise at all times. A variety of residential facilities also provide round-the-clock care. Unlike many of the institutions years ago, today's facilities view residents as people with human needs, and offer opportunities for recreation and simple, but meaningful work. Still, some facilities are isolated from the community, separating people with autism from the rest of the world


Quote:
3. If 2 is true, (social) errors in the communication are punished by the surroundings, so people try to avoid that.
4. If 3 is true, then people will if possible avoid saying things that might result in said punishment.


Those are your statements above that I was responding to; my response on fear and avoidance was in agreement that it can play a part in limiting social communication, but it is not necessarily predictive of whether or not someone is more logical than someone else. Some are rarely afraid to make responses in social communication, regardless if the responses are accepted as logical social ones or not.

I have provided the broad perspective of the impact of autism spectrum disorders, that provide evidence without a shadow of a doubt that the majority of individuals diagnosed do not have the ability to make the logical decisions in life, required to gain independence in life. There are millions of individuals evidenced in the world that experience autism spectrum disorders as a disabling disorder.

You based your statement on your own personal opinion that autistic individuals are more logical than the rest of the population. That statement is solidly disproven by thousands of third party resources that provide the extent of the problem that most autistic people have in making logical decisions in every day life functioning. I can start listing them one by one if you like. Here are a few.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/health/your_health&id=7870808

http://www.nami.org/Template.cfm?Section=Helpline1&Template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=66015

And there is also evidence that this is not just limited to those that are often called "low functioning individuals with autism".

http://sfari.org/news-and-opinion/news/2011/people-with-milder-forms-of-autism-struggle-as-adults

Quote:
People with milder forms of autism struggle as adults

Blurred boundaries:

Social skills have a greater impact on quality of life for people on the autism spectrum than do any specific diagnoses. Contrary to popular assumption, people diagnosed with so-called mild forms of autism don’t fare any better in life than those with severe forms of the disorder. That’s the conclusion of a new study that suggests that even individuals with normal intelligence and language abilities struggle to fit into society because of their social and communication problems.

In fact, people diagnosed with pervasive developmental disorder-not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) are no more likely to marry or have a job than those with more disabling forms of autism, according to a Norwegian study published online in June in the Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders1.

Early intervention has the potential to alter this trajectory, say experts. But until today’s children with autism reach maturity, it will be hard to say how much behavioral intervention at a young age can alter the course of their lives.

“The implication of our findings is that the consequences of having an autism spectrum disorder with profound difficulties in communication skills and social impairment can’t be compensated for by either high intellectual level or normal language function,” says lead investigator Anne Myhre, associate professor of mental health and addiction at the University of Oslo in Norway.

These findings provide support for the proposed merging of pervasive developmental disorder into the autism spectrum in the DSM-5, the edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) set to be published in 2013, the researchers say.

The new edition of the manual takes a spectrum approach, absorbing the separate categories of childhood disintegrative disorder, Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS into the broad category of autism spectrum disorder. The draft guidelines note that symptoms must appear in early childhood and affect everyday functioning.

“I’m glad that the authors see this as support for the DSM-5 proposed definitions,” says Sally Rogers, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the University of California, Davis’ MIND Institute. Rogers is a member of the neurodevelopmental working group revising the diagnostic criteria for autism.


Can your provide any third party evidence to refute any of these findings?

Your opinion is meaningful to you, however it does not match the evidence as it exists on the issue of people with ASD's, being more logical on average than the rest of the population. The fact is that ASD's for most individuals diagnosed, are inherently disabling in making the decisions required for independence in life.

And just in case you don't feel like the evidence I provided is precise enough to match what is or what is not logical decisions in life, in regard to the ability of autistic individuals; that specific question has been studied and evidenced. While autistic individuals are evidenced to perform well on non-verbal tests of reason, they are evidenced as less logical than than non-autistics per their ability to contextualize complex verbal material.

The control group in the study was evidenced as having cognitive abilities that were not significantly different than the group of autistic individuals studied.

This study does not address the 38% of individuals measured with autism that are measured as having intellectual disabilities, or the over thirty percent of individuals that are in the boarder line range of intellectual disability. Only about a third of autistic individuals are measured as having normal to above intellectual abilities, per the study funded by the Government CDC agency that provided the 1 in 88 statitistic.

Quote:
Instead of being more rational or more sensitive to the logical structure of the problems, autistic participants were less able to integrate contextual information into their representation of the tasks, or, potentially, less able to combine information from different sources. Autistic children can process complex nonverbal information, and they are also able to reason with
relations, as suggested by their performance on the Raven test (e.g., Dawson et al., 2007), and pictorial tests of analogical reasoning (Morsanyi & Holyoak, in press). Nevertheless, in the case of the present tasks autistic children showed less contextualization than the control
group. Moreover, when contextualization did occur it required more effort than in the control group. Taken together these data suggest a delay in the development of the ability to
contextualize complex verbal material in the autistic group (see also Lopez & Leekham, 2003).
you must agree that most of the time autistics are generaly more rational in there way of thinking


Autistics have been shown to excel in non-verbal tests of reasoning, per the evidence provided above, that equal and actually exceed control groups in some cases, however per the study above their ability to contextualize complex verbal material is less than those of similiar tested intellectual abilities, resulting in lower logical abilities.

Many logical decisions in life, are associated with social interaction, so while there may be strengths in the ares of non-verbal reasoning, there is evidenced disability in the type of logical reasoning required in social interaction that requires heuristic processing and the ability to contextualize complex verbal material.

In testing individuals with Aspergers in card games where winning and losing are subjective emotional factors that normally influence decisions, this can provide an advantage for individuals with Aspergers over those without Aspergers, because some are not influenced as much by emotion as the control group members.

This is an advantage in this type of scenario, alone the lines of non-verbal testing, but not one evididenced where complex verbal material must be contextualized.

Rationality has different definitions.. As it relates to schizotypal or "magical thinking", there is a correlation studied in individuals with Aspergers that correlates with higher levels of schizotypal or "magical thinking".

So, individuals on the autism spectrum have strengths and weaknesses per different definitions of rationality, but overall they are not evidenced as being more rational than the rest of the population per schizotypal thinking studied in individuals with Aspergers, or the overall ability of individuals with autism spectrum disorders to contextualize complex verbal material. Inidivduals across the spectrum, though, do quite well on non-verbal tests of Abstract reasoning.

If one were to use this site as an example to their only exposure to autism spectrum disorders one would come away with many different viewpoints of this issue, per anecdotal evidence, per forum, or per which individual they were reading.

It is highly dependent on individual differences, environment, diagnosis, inherent factors, culture, education, and probably a thousand other factors. But, per the majority of individuals that have difficulties to disabilities in functioning in everyday life actually measured as professionally diagnosed, there is no overall advantage measured in rationality or logical ability per all those studied with ASD's.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

10 May 2012, 8:32 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Many others in the discussion have soundly refuted your statement as well.

By "many others" you mean Sweetleaf...

Wait I'm the only one here who has problems functioning? I think they did actually mean many people as there are quite a few who have similar struggles....I mean I know you think you're all logic but I think that's been disproven. For one trying to talk down to people on a forum for disagreeing with you is not really a move based on logic.

...


Yeah, just as I expected.


_________________
We won't go back.


Last edited by Sweetleaf on 11 May 2012, 10:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

10 May 2012, 9:20 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Social skills have a greater impact on quality of life for people on the autism spectrum than do any specific diagnoses. Contrary to popular assumption, people diagnosed with so-called mild forms of autism don’t fare any better in life than those with severe forms of the disorder. That’s the conclusion of a new study that suggests that even individuals with normal intelligence and language abilities struggle to fit into society because of their social and communication problems.


This is so obviously not true it's unbelivable you even posted the crap here.
And to be very picky, this thread, and thus my first statement was about Aspies.

Aghogday Wrote:

If you dispute the evidenced material your argument is with those that did the study and provided the peer reviewed results. You attribute the quote to me, but it is not my quote, it is a quote from an article referencing the research.

If you meant aspies you could have said aspies; you said autistics, however that's no problem, I've addressed the differences in studies that have been provided in my last post among the different disorders, including the correlation of schizotypal thinking (magical thinking) and aspergers.

Quote:
Those are your statements above that I was responding to; my response on fear and avoidance was in agreement that it can play a part in limiting social communication, but it is not necessarily predictive of whether or not someone is more logical than someone else. Some are rarely afraid to make responses in social communication, regardless if the responses are accepted as logical social ones or not.

Yes, and that's the beuty of statistics, these "some" will always be a minority. What is more likley to occur, occurs generaly more often than something less likely. That is undisputable.

Aghogday Wrote:
Avoiding response is not necessarily an indication of logic for some whom may be afraid to respond because of social admonishment, it is only an indication of no response as it relates to logical communication

Quote:
I have provided the broad perspective of the impact of autism spectrum disorders, that provide evidence without a shadow of a doubt that the majority of individuals diagnosed do not have the ability to make the logical decisions in life, required to gain independence in life. There are millions of individuals evidenced in the world that experience autism spectrum disorders as a disabling disorder.

And you made a whopsie again. Logic has no goal, it can't be judged by a persons "quailty of life", because these are fabricated by our culture. Logic is a way of thinking and a tool for problem solving, nothing els.

Aghogday Wrote:
I made no statements regarding quality of life; nor that logic has a goal; there is logic that provides correct outcomes and there is logic that provides incorrect outcomes. You quoted the third party reference I provided, not me, per quality of life.

Problem solving is required in social communication as well as in decisions that allow one to gain independence in life.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

10 May 2012, 11:20 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
@aghogday
you present very well that autistics are rational thinkers just by the way you post
for instance your arguements are based on evidence and facts typicaly coming from wikipedia.when people disagree with you present a link that suports your claim and refutes the others claim.your posts are long and contain many facts that you use to present your arguement.you dont show much emotion when discussing things even when others are rude.neurotypicals on the other put more emphasis on emotion,neurotypical respect self confidence and will believe who ever sounds like they know what there talking about.who ever has the most self confidence when they speak is who neurotypicals will believe regardless of what evidence is presented.talk loud and have much confidence and neurotypicals will believe anything you say.
you saying that autistics are not more rational then neurotypical is like the" pot not calling the kettle black" to use an old expression.


Peer reviewed research, is provided oversight in an attempt to ensure bias is not part of the researched analysis.

It's a wonderful way to cut through emotional bias, that all human beings are subject to. My opinion, on it's own, would mean little to nothing without it.

If someone can provide third party evidence to refute what I have presented, I have no problem learning something new and moving in a new direction. However just saying it's not so or this is how it is, is not refutation of those that have taken the time and effort to research a topic, under the peer review of recognized experts in the field of the research that is identified.

In fact it's not logical, if someone is science minded. Not everyone that participates in these forums have allegiance to the scientific method nor should they have to. I happen to value it over my own preconceived notions.

Some of my personal opinions are not evidenced by others, on Google; which is either evidence of creativity or a non-reasoned mind. I'm not quite sure one can even be creative, if they are bound in a shallow world of emotion, unless they are trying to find it.

Logic and emotion work hand in hand in success in life; the yin and yang balance of life, that has been understood well before western science was invented, and the connections of emotion/logic were studied in peer reviewed research.

Western culture is a threat to the Yin, world wide. Hard to understand how an over commercialized culture that pushes food and sex into every crevice of life, could be harmful to the Yin, but it has recently been evidenced in peer reviewed research to play a role in damaging it. Marketing is based on scientific analysis as well; it is hard to escape logic. The word Yin, was not used in the research, but interestingly enough the research was conducted in Eastern Culture.

The voice of reason, is neither weighted in logic alone or emotion; it is evident in a balance of both. When I was young one of the few places to find a balance was in song.

With that, I leave a little song that provides an emotional take on the potential pitfalls of a mind and culture overly devoted to logical analysis. :) If one hasn't come across it, it is worth listening to.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQfjIw3mivc&feature=player_detailpage[/youtube]



Silvervarg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Jan 2009
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 787
Location: Sweden

11 May 2012, 4:25 am

aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Social skills have a greater impact on quality of life for people on the autism spectrum than do any specific diagnoses. Contrary to popular assumption, people diagnosed with so-called mild forms of autism don’t fare any better in life than those with severe forms of the disorder. That’s the conclusion of a new study that suggests that even individuals with normal intelligence and language abilities struggle to fit into society because of their social and communication problems.


This is so obviously not true it's unbelivable you even posted the crap here.
And to be very picky, this thread, and thus my first statement was about Aspies.

If you dispute the evidenced material your argument is with those that did the study and provided the peer reviewed results. You attribute the quote to me, but it is not my quote, it is a quote from an article referencing the research.

If you meant aspies you could have said aspies; you said autistics, however that's no problem, I've addressed the differences in studies that have been provided in my last post among the different disorders, including the correlation of schizotypal thinking (magical thinking) and aspergers.

You posted it, that's why the quote is adressed to you, otherwise it'd looked like it was Sweetleaf who wrote it.
And you posted it here as an argument, therefor you are accountable, unless someone forced you to include it at gun point.

I never claimed anything about autistics, except when replying to your posts, and why do you think I've repeated "Irrelevent" like a freaking parrot...

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Those are your statements above that I was responding to; my response on fear and avoidance was in agreement that it can play a part in limiting social communication, but it is not necessarily predictive of whether or not someone is more logical than someone else. Some are rarely afraid to make responses in social communication, regardless if the responses are accepted as logical social ones or not.

Yes, and that's the beuty of statistics, these "some" will always be a minority. What is more likley to occur, occurs generaly more often than something less likely. That is undisputable.

Avoiding response is not necessarily an indication of logic for some whom may be afraid to respond because of social admonishment, it is only an indication of no response as it relates to logical communication

... Time to wash your eyes and read that post again, because you (again) failed to understand it.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have provided the broad perspective of the impact of autism spectrum disorders, that provide evidence without a shadow of a doubt that the majority of individuals diagnosed do not have the ability to make the logical decisions in life, required to gain independence in life. There are millions of individuals evidenced in the world that experience autism spectrum disorders as a disabling disorder.

And you made a whopsie again. Logic has no goal, it can't be judged by a persons "quailty of life", because these are fabricated by our culture. Logic is a way of thinking and a tool for problem solving, nothing els.

I made no statements regarding quality of life; nor that logic has a goal; there is logic that provides correct outcomes and there is logic that provides incorrect outcomes. You quoted the third party reference I provided, not me, per quality of life.

Problem solving is required in social communication as well as in decisions that allow one to gain independence in life.

Yes you did, I highlighted it for you so you wouldn't miss it. You said "They aren't logical because they can't take care of themselves." That is a judgement of their logical capabilites based on their quality of life.

Quote:
Peer reviewed research, is provided oversight in an attempt to ensure bias is not part of the researched analysis.

It's a wonderful way to cut through emotional bias, that all human beings are subject to. My opinion, on it's own, would mean little to nothing without it.

You seem unaware of a few things, so let me explain.
1. Peer review will only accept things they are willing to accept, this has been the problem of the system as long as it has existed.
2. There are several openly bias groups providing reviews for "science" they support. (Creatonism comes to mind first.)

A peer reviewed report is by no means a fool proof way of finding the "truth".

Quote:
Logic and emotion work hand in hand in success in life; the yin and yang balance of life, that has been understood well before western science was invented, and the connections of emotion/logic were studied in peer reviewed research.

The only ones who have stated such things here as been you, about our points, which is still wrong.


_________________
Sing songs. Songs sung. Samsung.


Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

11 May 2012, 7:19 am

vermontsavant wrote:
@aghogday
you present very well that autistics are rational thinkers just by the way you post
for instance your arguements are based on evidence and facts typicaly coming from wikipedia.when people disagree with you present a link that suports your claim and refutes the others claim.your posts are long and contain many facts that you use to present your arguement.you dont show much emotion when discussing things even when others are rude.neurotypicals on the other put more emphasis on emotion,neurotypical respect self confidence and will believe who ever sounds like they know what there talking about.who ever has the most self confidence when they speak is who neurotypicals will believe regardless of what evidence is presented.talk loud and have much confidence and neurotypicals will believe anything you say.
you saying that autistics are not more rational then neurotypical is like the" pot not calling the kettle black" to use an old expression.



Ahogday does have a calm and rational posting style. However, autism is not a requirement for being able to present arguments this way. In fact, being able to present arguments this way is a requirement of all who want to succeed in academia and research. If you go to websites frequented by those people, you'll see this posting style a lot. In addition to WP, I go to websites about the paleo lifestyle, which apparently attracts many people in biochemistry and medical research and so I see this posting style a lot.

There are people with autism in research and academia. Ahogday may be one of them. (Hopefully this speculation is not annoying ahogday. I'll delete if it is.) But, as with many things, most of the people involved are not autistic.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

11 May 2012, 12:27 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Social skills have a greater impact on quality of life for people on the autism spectrum than do any specific diagnoses. Contrary to popular assumption, people diagnosed with so-called mild forms of autism don’t fare any better in life than those with severe forms of the disorder. That’s the conclusion of a new study that suggests that even individuals with normal intelligence and language abilities struggle to fit into society because of their social and communication problems.


This is so obviously not true it's unbelivable you even posted the crap here.
And to be very picky, this thread, and thus my first statement was about Aspies.

If you dispute the evidenced material your argument is with those that did the study and provided the peer reviewed results. You attribute the quote to me, but it is not my quote, it is a quote from an article referencing the research.

If you meant aspies you could have said aspies; you said autistics, however that's no problem, I've addressed the differences in studies that have been provided in my last post among the different disorders, including the correlation of schizotypal thinking (magical thinking) and aspergers.

You posted it, that's why the quote is adressed to you, otherwise it'd looked like it was Sweetleaf who wrote it.
And you posted it here as an argument, therefor you are accountable, unless someone forced you to include it at gun point.

Aghogday Wrote
The quote is not attributed per reference of who wrote it. Aghogday did not write it, he quoted it from a third party reference. The reference was provided in the previous post. I provided it as evidence that higher functioning autistic individuals have problems in social communication, similar to some of those identified identified as "lower functioning". One need look no further than these forums, if one wants additional anecdotal evidence of that.



I never claimed anything about autistics, except when replying to your posts, and why do you think I've repeated "Irrelevent" like a freaking parrot...

Aghogday Wrote:
You've clarified it now, so it's no longer a problem.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Those are your statements above that I was responding to; my response on fear and avoidance was in agreement that it can play a part in limiting social communication, but it is not necessarily predictive of whether or not someone is more logical than someone else. Some are rarely afraid to make responses in social communication, regardless if the responses are accepted as logical social ones or not.

Yes, and that's the beuty of statistics, these "some" will always be a minority. What is more likley to occur, occurs generaly more often than something less likely. That is undisputable.

Avoiding response is not necessarily an indication of logic for some whom may be afraid to respond because of social admonishment, it is only an indication of no response as it relates to logical communication

... Time to wash your eyes and read that post again, because you (again) failed to understand it.

Aghoday Wrote:
You stated words to the effect that some would avoid social communication because they were punished in social communication. That's not necessarily an indication of logic in those individuals, it's an indication of avoidance of communication. If you meant something else you'll need to explain it.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have provided the broad perspective of the impact of autism spectrum disorders, that provide evidence without a shadow of a doubt that the majority of individuals diagnosed do not have the ability to make the logical decisions in life, required to gain independence in life. There are millions of individuals evidenced in the world that experience autism spectrum disorders as a disabling disorder.

And you made a whopsie again. Logic has no goal, it can't be judged by a persons "quailty of life", because these are fabricated by our culture. Logic is a way of thinking and a tool for problem solving, nothing els.

I made no statements regarding quality of life; nor that logic has a goal; there is logic that provides correct outcomes and there is logic that provides incorrect outcomes. You quoted the third party reference I provided, not me, per quality of life.

Problem solving is required in social communication as well as in decisions that allow one to gain independence in life.

Yes you did, I highlighted it for you so you wouldn't miss it. You said "They aren't logical because they can't take care of themselves." That is a judgement of their logical capabilites based on their quality of life.

Aghogday Wrote:
You highlighted a statement from a reference I provided, regarding quality of life. I did not make the statement you quoted above. I made no personal judgement on someone's quality of life, per that subjective element of one's life. The referenced article evidences it, not me.

Nor, did I say that someone wasn't logical because they can't take care of themselves, I said "I have provided the broad perspective of the impact of autism spectrum disorders, that provide evidence without a shadow of a doubt that the majority of individuals diagnosed do not have the ability to make the logical decisions in life, required to gain independence in life". This statement does not dictate how one views the quality of their life, or that someone does not exercise logical decisions in some areas of their life.

Per example, some individuals have special interests that interfere with logical decisions as they apply to everyday life functioning, per criteria standards, but this does not mean they are necessarily unhappy about their quality of life, or want it any other way.

The research provides evidence that many autistic individuals are living at home, provided subsistence, and/or supervision as required, depending on their symptoms. This research as evidenced is applicable among those identified as having mild forms of autism as well as severe forms of autism.


Quote:
Peer reviewed research, is provided oversight in an attempt to ensure bias is not part of the researched analysis.

It's a wonderful way to cut through emotional bias, that all human beings are subject to. My opinion, on it's own, would mean little to nothing without it.

You seem unaware of a few things, so let me explain.
1. Peer review will only accept things they are willing to accept, this has been the problem of the system as long as it has existed.
2. There are several openly bias groups providing reviews for "science" they support. (Creatonism comes to mind first.)

Aghogday Wrote:
Neither of these two issues have been identified as problems specific to the third party sources that I have provided. If you have third party evidence that they have, you are welcome to provide it.

The peer review process, nor the scientific method is perfect, but peer reviewed evidence provided by the scientific method beats anecdotal evidence, per emotional bias, in almost every case. There are no filters for emotional bias in internet discussions, other than oppositional opinions or third party evidence that uses the scientific method, to refute emotionaly biased statements.

Quote:
Logic and emotion work hand in hand in success in life; the yin and yang balance of life, that has been understood well before western science was invented, and the connections of emotion/logic were studied in peer reviewed research.

The only ones who have stated such things here as been you, about our points, which is still wrong.


Aghogday Wrote:
I made it clear that this paragraph was my opinion; it is based on Eastern Philosophy, and certain songs, per the example I provided. Anecdotal evidence, of which all your points per your statement regarding autistics, disability, and logic, have been based upon, so far in this topic discussion.



Last edited by aghogday on 11 May 2012, 7:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TheSunAlsoRises
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,039

11 May 2012, 1:20 pm

Aghogday,

This is one of my favorite songs. Thanks for post it.


TheSunAlsoRises



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,561

11 May 2012, 7:46 pm

TheSunAlsoRises wrote:
Aghogday,

This is one of my favorite songs. Thanks for post it.


TheSunAlsoRises


Your welcome, music was one of the only sources of philosophical thought, beyond Abrahamic Religious thought in my area, in my formative years.

My first year of college, and a philosophy course, was my first exposure outside of a tightly fit cultural paradigm of life. That song came out the same year during a philosophy course that I took in logic; it was a voice of reason for me at that time, that I failed to heed in later years of my life, succumbing enthuisiastically to a new world of logic, driven by novel sources of stimuli; moving away from a healthy balance of emotion and logic..

In my opinion the Yin and Yang folks go it right centuries ago; but they could have never conceived of the sources of stimulus that drive human nature today.

The Abrahamic folks had one simple word for it; Moderation.

The world today, appears to be tougher on the neurology of some with autism spectrum disorders, particularly in areas of stimulus addiction.

Organized religious activity, is evidenced as statistically dropping off, since the turn of the century. The target audience is getting smaller.

The opiates of the masses is changing, as an evidenced much more powerful source of intrinsic reward.

If one's spirit is equivalent to their emotional fire, there is an extinguisher in culture that is greater than any mythology of a beast, some 2000 years ago.

Science provides some interesting answers to age old philosphies, that have been questioned for thousands of years. :)



edgewaters
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,427
Location: Ontario

11 May 2012, 7:49 pm

Aghogday ... if you don't mind me asking (and its fine if you'd rather keep this private) ... when and where did you grow up?