Page 6 of 14 [ 220 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 14  Next

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,562

08 May 2012, 5:02 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion/claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.



Last edited by aghogday on 08 May 2012, 11:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

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

08 May 2012, 5:29 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Well now you've really lost me...because from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said about aspies being more logical than neurotypicals as well as the basis of the OP.

Please make up your mind because you're really not consistent.
Sweetleaf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not contridicting anything you said there.

... from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said...


Quote:
Quote:
I think we have different definitions of the word "interesting".

Not sure how that would work as I don't know there are very many different definitions of interesting, though different people certainly find different things interesting.

Level of intencity in the feeling, if I say I'm interested in something it means I'll learn anything I can about it, otherwise I'd say I was curious about whatever it is. Apparently this is not the case with you, you use interested much more mildly, thus our definitions differ.

Quote:
People go along with things they don't identify with all the time........so I feel my point still stands that having AS does not necessarily make one less likely to follow mob mentality when given the chance.

Example please? Because last time I checked sport arenas where packed with people painting their faces, protest rallies with chants and signs, people following dress codes to the letter, etc^99999.

Quote:
Or maybe they just don't want to....I can imagine the long hair some bikers have would be pretty uncomfortable in a helmet on a hot day so I imagine there are lots of reasons a biker might not want to wear a helmet that have nothing to do with social acceptance. I think its stupid that it's a law personally........I mean its not like not wearing one ensures you're going to die of a head injury that's only a risk if you fall or get hit and even with a helmet one could still be screwed anyways.

Maybe they should require helmets for walking across the street since people have died from getting hit by cars and the resulting head injuries.

... You're kidding right? You do realise that a fall from a the equvilent hight of someone sitting on a chair is enough to kill someone if the head strikes the ground with full force. My mother used to work for the department in charge of roads and safty and was personaly involved in the Zero Vision (no one should die in trafic accidents), helmets saves thousands around the world. And thousands more would have been saved if they'd worn helmets.
And the argument itself is truely ignorant since the base element is "It will only save you if something happens...".

Janissy wrote:
People (both NT and AS) use a mix of emotion and logic to make decisions. There will be outliers such as brain injured people who have lost the ability to use emotion to help with decisions or some people with severly impaired impulse control who have lost (or never had) the ability to control emotion-based decisions. I am not including some mentally ill people who make decisions that look illogical to the majority (such as psychotic people making illusion-based decisions) because those decisions still use logic as well as emotion.

Sadly I don't remeber the name of the ones doing this study, but it was a very simple one, they told people they where making a new eye controled computor and asked them to try the mouse pointer, it would follow their eye movement, I don't know how many exactly where very happy with the technology, but enough for the test to be considered a success, since the mouse pointer was controled by a hidden person and not the test subjects. If you're interested in reading it I can try and find it.
And since I consider the act (I expressed this earlier, but we sliped back into mind process only) a part of the decision.
Or to simplyfy: Choosing the less logical option is not logical, even if it was logical on its own.

Quote:
I have bought lottery tickets from time to time. I know that it is statistically unlikely I will win any drawing I enter. I also know that it is fun to indulge in the anticipation of the big drawing and I can well afford the small price of a ticket so long as I don't make a habit of it. That's an example of using a combination of logic and emotion to make a decision. To somebody who doesn't get any enjoyment from the anticipation of the drawing, it will seem illogical. But what I have actually done is make a cost-benefit analysis which factors in the cost (1$ now and then) as being worth the benefit (enjoyment of the anticipation) and cost benefit analyses are very logical ways to make decisions.

The person who truly does no cost-benefit analysis and spends money they can't afford or acts as though the money had already been won (instead of accepting it almost certainly won't be) is not being logical. The person in your example may be doing that. But they may also just be playing making a perfectly logical decision to exchange 1$ for the light entertainment of anticipation.

I'm afraid I failed a bit with the example, the point was not them buying a ticket in general, but chosing a specific ticket because of their "instincts" or what ever they want to call it, instead of chosing a statisticly safer option.

Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.
are you realy so sure that it was your signature that got you banned


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

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

08 May 2012, 5:35 pm

aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.
autistics ARE more logical than the rest of the population because the vollume on there senses is turned up so high and this causes constant hypnosis.this constent hypnosis causes endorphines in the brain to go off constantly causing the autistic to become disconected from ones own body sensations and emotions.


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,562

08 May 2012, 11:41 pm

vermontsavant wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion/claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.
autistics ARE more logical than the rest of the population because the vollume on there senses is turned up so high and this causes constant hypnosis.this constent hypnosis causes endorphines in the brain to go off constantly causing the autistic to become disconected from ones own body sensations and emotions.


Alexithymia has been measured as a co-morbid condition in up to 85% of individuals with Alexithymia. This can be a disabling emotional condition, in itself. However, complete lack of emotion is evidenced by science to make it more difficult to make rational/logical decisions, not easier.

So, in general problems with emotions are evidenced higher among the autistic population that the rest of the population, but problems with emotions don't necessarily equal rational or logical decisions in life.

Some autistic individuals report experiencing very strong emotions, so it is dependent on the individual and the circumstances as to how their emotions impact their lives. And, some autistic individuals are hypo-sensitive to environmental stimuli rather than hyper-sensitive. That too is dependent on individual and circumstance.

I'm not questioning how you as an individual experience autism as you describe it above, but sensory integration problems and emotional difficulties vary greatly among those diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. As well, as an autistic individuals ability to make rational/logical descisions in life. Some of those that are more severely impacted by the condition have difficulties in making decisions as they relate to basic self-care behaviors.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 12:30 am

Silvervarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Well now you've really lost me...because from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said about aspies being more logical than neurotypicals as well as the basis of the OP.

Please make up your mind because you're really not consistent.
Sweetleaf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not contridicting anything you said there.

... from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said...


:?

Quote:
Quote:
I think we have different definitions of the word "interesting".

Not sure how that would work as I don't know there are very many different definitions of interesting, though different people certainly find different things interesting.

Level of intencity in the feeling, if I say I'm interested in something it means I'll learn anything I can about it, otherwise I'd say I was curious about whatever it is. Apparently this is not the case with you, you use interested much more mildly, thus our definitions differ.

I do learn everything I can about things I am interested in, that does not mean this knowledge necessarily gets me anywhere in life.

Quote:
People go along with things they don't identify with all the time........so I feel my point still stands that having AS does not necessarily make one less likely to follow mob mentality when given the chance.

Example please? Because last time I checked sport arenas where packed with people painting their faces, protest rallies with chants and signs, people following dress codes to the letter, etc^99999.

There are never people with AS or Autism at sort arenas and protest rallies?

Quote:
Or maybe they just don't want to....I can imagine the long hair some bikers have would be pretty uncomfortable in a helmet on a hot day so I imagine there are lots of reasons a biker might not want to wear a helmet that have nothing to do with social acceptance. I think its stupid that it's a law personally........I mean its not like not wearing one ensures you're going to die of a head injury that's only a risk if you fall or get hit and even with a helmet one could still be screwed anyways.

Maybe they should require helmets for walking across the street since people have died from getting hit by cars and the resulting head injuries.

... You're kidding right? You do realise that a fall from a the equvilent hight of someone sitting on a chair is enough to kill someone if the head strikes the ground with full force. My mother used to work for the department in charge of roads and safty and was personaly involved in the Zero Vision (no one should die in trafic accidents), helmets saves thousands around the world. And thousands more would have been saved if they'd worn helmets.
And the argument itself is truely ignorant since the base element is "It will only save you if something happens...".


Kidding about what, and that is 'if' the head strikes the ground with full force........speaking of which I probably should have been wearing a helmet the one night I was drinking and fell out of a chair straight on my face to wake up wondering why I had a swollen lip(which I assumed was a cold sore) and bump on my head.

Also I don't see what is ignorant about a fact....I mean how does a helmet save someone if they never suffer a fall where they hit their head? One other thought it is possible even with a helmet someone could get a brain injury that might make their life terrible.....maybe without the helmet the would have just died and not had to live in misery..........morbid, but when making laws I think all relevant points should be considered.


_________________
We won't go back.


marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

09 May 2012, 12:32 am

vermontsavant wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.
autistics ARE more logical than the rest of the population because the vollume on there senses is turned up so high and this causes constant hypnosis.this constent hypnosis causes endorphines in the brain to go off constantly causing the autistic to become disconected from ones own body sensations and emotions.


I wish that was the case. All having the "volume turned up on my senses" does to me is fry my nerves, making me more irritable, and having stronger emotional reactions than NTs who can feel relaxed in the midst of abrasive external noise and chaos.



Silvervarg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 3:15 am

aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion/claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.

Nope, I'm blaming you. And since I never stated that, so I'm sure you did.

Edit:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Well now you've really lost me...because from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said about aspies being more logical than neurotypicals as well as the basis of the OP.

Please make up your mind because you're really not consistent.
Sweetleaf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not contridicting anything you said there.

... from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said...


:?

Yeah, remebering what you're argueing about can be a good thing...

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think we have different definitions of the word "interesting".

Not sure how that would work as I don't know there are very many different definitions of interesting, though different people certainly find different things interesting.

Level of intencity in the feeling, if I say I'm interested in something it means I'll learn anything I can about it, otherwise I'd say I was curious about whatever it is. Apparently this is not the case with you, you use interested much more mildly, thus our definitions differ.
I do learn everything I can about things I am interested in, that does not mean this knowledge necessarily gets me anywhere in life.

What does "gets you anywhere" means specificly?

Quote:
Quote:
People go along with things they don't identify with all the time........so I feel my point still stands that having AS does not necessarily make one less likely to follow mob mentality when given the chance.

Example please? Because last time I checked sport arenas where packed with people painting their faces, protest rallies with chants and signs, people following dress codes to the letter, etc^99999.
There are never people with AS or Autism at sort arenas and protest rallies?

Why are you making me repeat everything?
Silvervarg wrote:
... it's less likely a spectrumite sucumbs to these feelings since they do not relate to the group...


Quote:
Also I don't see what is ignorant about a fact....I mean how does a helmet save someone if they never suffer a fall where they hit their head? One other thought it is possible even with a helmet someone could get a brain injury that might make their life terrible.....maybe without the helmet the would have just died and not had to live in misery..........morbid, but when making laws I think all relevant points should be considered.

When you tell me how you see who's going to have an accident and how severe, I'll consider that a valid argument and respond.


_________________
Sing songs. Songs sung. Samsung.


Last edited by Silvervarg on 09 May 2012, 5:26 am, edited 3 times in total.

vermontsavant
Veteran
Veteran

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

09 May 2012, 4:47 am

aghogday wrote:
vermontsavant wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion/claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.
autistics ARE more logical than the rest of the population because the vollume on there senses is turned up so high and this causes constant hypnosis.this constent hypnosis causes endorphines in the brain to go off constantly causing the autistic to become disconected from ones own body sensations and emotions.


Alexithymia has been measured as a co-morbid condition in up to 85% of individuals with Alexithymia. This can be a disabling emotional condition, in itself. However, complete lack of emotion is evidenced by science to make it more difficult to make rational/logical decisions, not easier.

So, in general problems with emotions are evidenced higher among the autistic population that the rest of the population, but problems with emotions don't necessarily equal rational or logical decisions in life.

Some autistic individuals report experiencing very strong emotions, so it is dependent on the individual and the circumstances as to how their emotions impact their lives. And, some autistic individuals are hypo-sensitive to environmental stimuli rather than hyper-sensitive. That too is dependent on individual and circumstance.

I'm not questioning how you as an individual experience autism as you describe it above, but sensory integration problems and emotional difficulties vary greatly among those diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders. As well, as an autistic individuals ability to make rational/logical descisions in life. Some of those that are more severely impacted by the condition have difficulties in making decisions as they relate to basic self-care behaviors.
i didnt mean to imply that all autistics are emotionless,if anything the opposite is true and its hypertactilenees that leads to hypotactileness and or hyposensitivities.but hyposensitivity and hypotactileness is a root of logical thinking often


_________________
Forever gone
Sorry I ever joined


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 11:49 am

Silvervarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Well now you've really lost me...because from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said about aspies being more logical than neurotypicals as well as the basis of the OP.

Please make up your mind because you're really not consistent.
Sweetleaf wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not contridicting anything you said there.

... from my perspective I was disagreeing with what you said...


:?

Yeah, remebering what you're argueing about can be a good thing...

Well all I did was disagree that people with aspergers are more intelligent than neurotypicals by default which you were arguing....so yeah I don't see what you're still on about and I don't know how to explain it any better.

Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think we have different definitions of the word "interesting".

Not sure how that would work as I don't know there are very many different definitions of interesting, though different people certainly find different things interesting.

Level of intencity in the feeling, if I say I'm interested in something it means I'll learn anything I can about it, otherwise I'd say I was curious about whatever it is. Apparently this is not the case with you, you use interested much more mildly, thus our definitions differ.
I do learn everything I can about things I am interested in, that does not mean this knowledge necessarily gets me anywhere in life.

What does "gets you anywhere" means specificly?

I don't quite get the question, I haven't really gotten anywhere in life regardless of what interesting things I may learn about. So I don't really know what would get me anywhere.

Quote:
Quote:
People go along with things they don't identify with all the time........so I feel my point still stands that having AS does not necessarily make one less likely to follow mob mentality when given the chance.

Example please? Because last time I checked sport arenas where packed with people painting their faces, protest rallies with chants and signs, people following dress codes to the letter, etc^99999.
There are never people with AS or Autism at sort arenas and protest rallies?

Why are you making me repeat everything?
Silvervarg wrote:
... it's less likely a spectrumite sucumbs to these feelings since they do not relate to the group...


Well even from what I've seen and read even on this website it does not seem autism or aspergers makes one incapable of relating to a group, it might make social interaction difficult but it does not prevent the desire for relating to the group. I would agree it might be less likely someone with AS/Autism would be at such things but to assume only neurotypicals participate in such things is a little ignorant on your part.

Quote:
Also I don't see what is ignorant about a fact....I mean how does a helmet save someone if they never suffer a fall where they hit their head? One other thought it is possible even with a helmet someone could get a brain injury that might make their life terrible.....maybe without the helmet the would have just died and not had to live in misery..........morbid, but when making laws I think all relevant points should be considered.

When you tell me how you see who's going to have an accident and how severe, I'll consider that a valid argument and respond.


You don't...that is why wearing a helmet does not necessarily do any good......and I think it should be an individual choice up to the individual based on the risks they are willing to take or not take. But I am perfectly willing to agree to disagree on this as bikers and helmets isn't even something I think much about. Besides you've already responded and as far as I can tell you're not the authority on valid opinions about helmets so it really does not matter to me how valid you feel that argument is.


_________________
We won't go back.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 12:32 pm

The argument was not about a helmet versus non-helmet debate but whether or not it is socially acceptable for an autistic biker to wear a helmet when most bikers choose not to wear helmets. Today the argument is moot because in most states bikers are legally required to wear helmets. The same principle applies to a construction job. Is it socially acceptable for an autistic carpenter to wear a hard hat when nobody else is wearing one? One rainy day I showed up at work wearing a hard hat and everyone thought I was crazy even though my hard hat did a great job keeping my head from getting soaked. Again today it is a moot issue because most construction jobs require protective gear.

But my point is that most neurotypicals base their decisions on what is socially acceptable rather than a good logical choice.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 12:36 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
The argument was not about a helmet versus non-helmet debate but whether or not it is socially acceptable for an autistic biker to wear a helmet when most bikers choose not to wear helmets. Today the argument is moot because in most states bikers are legally required to wear helmets. The same principle applies to a construction job. Is it socially acceptable for an autistic carpenter to wear a hard hat when nobody else is wearing one? One rainy day I showed up at work wearing a hard hat and everyone thought I was crazy even though my hard hat did a great job keeping my head from getting soaked. Again today it is a moot issue because most construction jobs require protective gear.

But my point is that most neurotypicals base their decisions on what is socially acceptable rather than a good logical choice.


And then you're assuming most with autism base their decisions on good logical choice? See that is the part I am not getting....I would say people in general tend to base their decisions on what is socially acceptable. Because many with autism don't exactly fit in they aren't exactly welcome to follow what is socially acceptable(at least in my experience) even if they do want to. So I don't feel its that they necessarily are less likely to follow social norms when given the opportunity but that maybe our differences make it less likely we will be treated as 'part of the group.'. But I still don't think people with AS/Autism are by default more logical than neurotypicals.


_________________
We won't go back.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 12:52 pm

It would basically be impossible for me to fit in. There is no way in hell that i would ride a dangerous motorcycle and not wear a helmet and risk getting my head bashed in just so I would fit in with the other bikers. Of course today since helmets are legally required i stand a better chance of fitting in. But my biggest hurdle today is that I refuse to buy a motorcycle. From my way of thinking there are plenty of motorcycles and these machines should be shared.

Autistics are welcome to follow what is socially acceptable but often they refuse for good logical reasons. One person advised me that I should pick my battles. For things that do not matter I should try and conform and drink the same brand of beer everyone else is drinking but refrain from heavy drug use.



DogsWithoutHorses
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2012
Age: 30
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,146
Location: New York

09 May 2012, 1:07 pm

Sometimes it's logical to fit in with social norms because there is a demonstrable benefit to that. I don't think you're being all that logical by rejecting them.
What makes sense to you is not the same as what is the most logical.


_________________
If your success is defined as being well adjusted to injustice and well adapted to indifference, then we don?t want successful leaders. We want great leaders- who are unbought, unbound, unafraid, and unintimidated to tell the truth.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 1:14 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
It would basically be impossible for me to fit in. There is no way in hell that i would ride a dangerous motorcycle and not wear a helmet and risk getting my head bashed in just so I would fit in with the other bikers. Of course today since helmets are legally required i stand a better chance of fitting in. But my biggest hurdle today is that I refuse to buy a motorcycle. From my way of thinking there are plenty of motorcycles and these machines should be shared.

Autistics are welcome to follow what is socially acceptable but often they refuse for good logical reasons. One person advised me that I should pick my battles. For things that do not matter I should try and conform and drink the same brand of beer everyone else is drinking but refrain from heavy drug use.


Just going to throw this out there but the point of that conversation with that other poster was not about helmets I think they just brought that up to make some point about how my points were flawed or something. I don't know read back if you want to see the whole conversation......but I really can't say it makes much difference to me if you want to wear a helmet or not.

Also I don't think it can be said that the majority of time these socially acceptable things aren't followed because of logical reasons...I think there are other reasons as well. I mean I can think of a number of times I haven't wanted to fit into something due to more emotional reasons for instance if I saw someone being picked on I wouldn't join in not because doing so would be illogical(that's kind of irrelevant to me when it comes down to it). but because I think it's wrong to gang up on someone and pick on them. Though in some situations the logical choice might be to join in so i don't get singled out to but to hell with that.

I personally would never drink the same brand of beer everyone else is drinking....in a public setting because chances are that would mean Bud Light.


_________________
We won't go back.


Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

09 May 2012, 2:53 pm

This is a very interesting side discussion about logical versus non-logical decisions and choices. I land firmly in the middle with the contention that neither Aspies nor NTs are always logical or never logical in decision making. I think people, both Aspie and NT, use a mix of logic and non-logic. I specifically didn't say "emotional" as the opposite of logic because, as ahogday's posts explain, emotion is a necessary component of decision making.


However, we are probably all working with our own internal definitions of logical decision making. I googled and found this:

http://agreatsupervisor.com/articles/re ... cision.htm

It isn't a defintion of logical decisions but rather advice on how to make them. But I think it helps to have some sort of idea of what people consider a logical way to make a decision.

Here is my personal definition: A logical decision is any decisions where the benefits that are the outcome of the decision outweigh the costs.

Do others agree with this definition, or have their own definition?



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,562

09 May 2012, 3:01 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
[Edit: Ohh and aghogday, I'm sure as hell not going to answer posts that consists of people quoting themselves in real time, if I find myself spending more time trying to figure out how and where you're writing compared to understanding what you wrote, I'm just wasting time.


Suit yourself, I feel confident I provided more than enough evidence to refute your assertion/claim that autism is labeled as a disability because autistics are more logical than the rest of the population.

Nope, I'm blaming you. And since I never stated that, so I'm sure you did.


Quote:
Ohh how I love the fact that being logical is considered a disablility, it's truly an NT world
This is the exact statement that you made that I soundly refuted with third party evidence.

The refutation of your statement has nothing to do with how you as individual view yourself as logical or your perception of your specific level of ability to experience emotions, it is based on real world statistics on the logical problems that many autistic individuals have in navigating the world and making decisions as simple as those that concern self help skills. Many others in the discussion have soundly refuted your statement as well.