Page 4 of 14 [ 220 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 14  Next

Silvervarg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

07 May 2012, 2:21 am

Tuttle wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
Tuttle wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
Ohh how I love the fact that being logical is considered a disablility, it's truly an NT world. :lol:


Asperger's is far more than "being logical". In fact, I'd argue that being logical isn't even part of having Asperger's.

Please elaborate because I've studied my fellow men and psycology on the universety and the only conclusion I have so far is that NTs are not logical, I am.


Have you actually seen the diagnostic criteria?

(DSM-5 proposal: http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/P ... spx?rid=94 ,
Gillberg criteria: http://www.bbbautism.com/asp_gillberg.htm ,
ICD-10 criteria: http://www.iancommunity.org/cs/about_as ... s_syndrome)

Being "logical" to the point where its impairing will let you meet less than half of what Asperger's is, but only that will not allow anyone to be diagnosable.

And I never said or implyed that it did, it would be pointless since this is not a debate about how to get diagnosed.
But thanks for the links, I've been looking for those for quite a while.

aghogday wrote:
While you may not experience many of these difficulties they are evidenced in others on the Autism Spectrum.

As far as emotions go all individuals are subject to it in their decision making process whether the influence is shallow internal emotions or strong external emotions. Those individuals evidenced as losing their ability for emotion, through traumatic brain injury cannnot even make decisions as simple as choosing what color sock to wear..

Notice this difference: "Base" is not synonomus to "Influense".
And what are you trying to tell me? That I do not have a traumatic brain injury? I already knew that.

Quote:
Emotions cannot be used as arguments they are feelings not words, they underly what motivates the decision making process and influence whatever logic/rationality is intended and perceived from the decision making process.

Incorrect, the following example proves this: "I will take this lottory ticket, because my gut tells me it's a winner." A person basing decision on emotions will go for a gut feeling rather than a statistical (and there for logical) option.

Quote:
To what degree does emotion influence decision making in this original statement?

Per logical analysis, there is no scientific evidence anywhere that individuals on the Autism Spectrum as a whole have an inherent advantage over individuals outside of the diagnosis, per their ability to make logical decisions that result in rational behaviors in life.

And to simply turn that around, there are none to prove otherwise.

Quote:
Furthermore there is no clear definition of what "NT" even means, other than non-autistic. While the world is evidenced to comprise close to 99% of non diagnosed autistics, there is no commonly understood definition for typical neurology, not even within the science of neurology. The closest description in neuroscience is an unremarkable MRI. The differences in neurology that separate autistics from non-autistics is not even well understood.

Somewhat incorrect, NT means you're not meeting the criteria for any of the different spectrums, there are more of them than the Autistic.

Quote:
And finally, autistic traits are evidenced in up to 30% of the population in studies done both in the US and Sweden. So, the neurotypical individual that a person whom considers themself as neuro-atypical, may think they are looking at in close to 1 out of 3 people they meet in life, may have similiar neurology, that can neither be identified in science, or necessarily identified in overt behavior.

Erhm... Is there a point?

Quote:
In conversations on this site, rarely is NT used as a non-emotional term. For the most part it is used as a pejorative, which at it's base is a descriptor for a term used for emotional intent, rather than logical analysis of an issue.

[Sarcasm]Wow... after ~700 post you just blew my mind.[/Sarkasm]
And in what way is this contradicting my statement?

Quote:
It's not unusual at all though, because everyone is ruled by their decision making process and resulting behaviors, to different degrees through their emotions, either internal and/or external; autistics are not exempt. Only those that have traumatic brain injury are evidenced as being exempt, and also evidenced as being disabled in their decision making process, and resulting behaviors.

Even psychopaths have a range of internal emotions that consist of emotions such as pleasure, irritibility, and anger, with extremely shallow pro-social external emotions that may appear as non-existent such as remorse and guilt. They too are ruled by internal emotions in the decision making process, and behaviors that result from those decisions.

Lack of evidence is not evidence of the contrary.

Sweetleaf wrote:
Silverwarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
I don't know about that....just because you might behave logically does not mean everyone with AS does....nor that it's some super human ability. There are neurotypicals who behave logically as well.


You too, Solomon Asch, and Millgram aswell.

And when did acting logicly become a super human ability...?


Never said it was...I was saying it wasn't

I never said you said it, but in order for you to feel it neccessary to contradict it someone must have said/implyed it, otherwise it's just a random remark, which would be utterly pointless.

Quote:
Quote:
I never said it did, but since one of the criteria for autism or related is a decrease in interest in social interaction (as far as I know), it's less likely a spectrumite sucumbs to these feelings since they do not relate to the group or its needs. Logical conclusion.

Its not nessisarly a decrease in intrest in social interaction, its difficulties with social interaction....so many of us still desire social interaction but our difficulties with social interaction interfere.

This might be more of an opinion on my part, but from my experience, if we are interested to learn about something, we do learn it, if we don't, then we don't. To simply have a wish/desire to learn, because it might simplyfy things are not enough.

Quote:
Also having an intrest in social interaction does not indicate one follows mob mentality.

No, again, I did not state such is the case, I said risk is elivated if you identify with the group. (Technicly I said the reversed, but one follows the other.)


_________________
Sing songs. Songs sung. Samsung.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

07 May 2012, 4:34 am

Silvervarg wrote:
Tuttle wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
Tuttle wrote:
Silvervarg wrote:
Ohh how I love the fact that being logical is considered a disablility, it's truly an NT world. :lol:


Asperger's is far more than "being logical". In fact, I'd argue that being logical isn't even part of having Asperger's.

Please elaborate because I've studied my fellow men and psycology on the universety and the only conclusion I have so far is that NTs are not logical, I am.


Have you actually seen the diagnostic criteria?

(DSM-5 proposal: http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/P ... spx?rid=94 ,
Gillberg criteria: http://www.bbbautism.com/asp_gillberg.htm ,
ICD-10 criteria: http://www.iancommunity.org/cs/about_as ... s_syndrome)

Being "logical" to the point where its impairing will let you meet less than half of what Asperger's is, but only that will not allow anyone to be diagnosable.

And I never said or implyed that it did, it would be pointless since this is not a debate about how to get diagnosed.
But thanks for the links, I've been looking for those for quite a while.

aghogday wrote:
While you may not experience many of these difficulties they are evidenced in others on the Autism Spectrum.

As far as emotions go all individuals are subject to it in their decision making process whether the influence is shallow internal emotions or strong external emotions. Those individuals evidenced as losing their ability for emotion, through traumatic brain injury cannnot even make decisions as simple as choosing what color sock to wear..

Notice this difference: "Base" is not synonomus to "Influense".
And what are you trying to tell me? That I do not have a traumatic brain injury? I already knew that.

Quote:
Emotions cannot be used as arguments they are feelings not words, they underly what motivates the decision making process and influence whatever logic/rationality is intended and perceived from the decision making process.

Incorrect, the following example proves this: "I will take this lottory ticket, because my gut tells me it's a winner." A person basing decision on emotions will go for a gut feeling rather than a statistical (and there for logical) option.

Quote:
To what degree does emotion influence decision making in this original statement?

Per logical analysis, there is no scientific evidence anywhere that individuals on the Autism Spectrum as a whole have an inherent advantage over individuals outside of the diagnosis, per their ability to make logical decisions that result in rational behaviors in life.

And to simply turn that around, there are none to prove otherwise.

Quote:
Furthermore there is no clear definition of what "NT" even means, other than non-autistic. While the world is evidenced to comprise close to 99% of non diagnosed autistics, there is no commonly understood definition for typical neurology, not even within the science of neurology. The closest description in neuroscience is an unremarkable MRI. The differences in neurology that separate autistics from non-autistics is not even well understood.

Somewhat incorrect, NT means you're not meeting the criteria for any of the different spectrums, there are more of them than the Autistic.

Quote:
And finally, autistic traits are evidenced in up to 30% of the population in studies done both in the US and Sweden. So, the neurotypical individual that a person whom considers themself as neuro-atypical, may think they are looking at in close to 1 out of 3 people they meet in life, may have similiar neurology, that can neither be identified in science, or necessarily identified in overt behavior.

Erhm... Is there a point?

Quote:
In conversations on this site, rarely is NT used as a non-emotional term. For the most part it is used as a pejorative, which at it's base is a descriptor for a term used for emotional intent, rather than logical analysis of an issue.

[Sarcasm]Wow... after ~700 post you just blew my mind.[/Sarkasm]
And in what way is this contradicting my statement?

Quote:
It's not unusual at all though, because everyone is ruled by their decision making process and resulting behaviors, to different degrees through their emotions, either internal and/or external; autistics are not exempt. Only those that have traumatic brain injury are evidenced as being exempt, and also evidenced as being disabled in their decision making process, and resulting behaviors.

Even psychopaths have a range of internal emotions that consist of emotions such as pleasure, irritibility, and anger, with extremely shallow pro-social external emotions that may appear as non-existent such as remorse and guilt. They too are ruled by internal emotions in the decision making process, and behaviors that result from those decisions.

Lack of evidence is not evidence of the contrary.


The entire demographic of individuals that are measured in the US, the 1 in 88, are 8 year old children in classes for the developmentally disabled. Thirty eight percent of whom are measured as having intellectual disabilities. 80% of individuals with autism spectrum disorders are evidenced as needing support from families or society to survive and 90% are evidenced not to be able to maintain steady employment. The issue of any potential advantage for any one person in logical thinking does not play into these statistics of disability in functioning in life, for the majority of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, measured as such.

You may be the most logically thinking person to walk the earth, however that does not diminish the disabilities of millions of individuals in the world diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.

I've provided third party evidence that decisions are based and influenced on emotion in human beings, including those individuals that are understood to have the shallowest of external emotion, psychopaths; you have provided no third party evidence to the contrary.

You made the statement that being logical is considered a disability, per this topic.

All forms of professionally diagnosed autism spectrum disorders are considered inherently disabling due to limits in brain function, per medical and legal definition.

The impairments resulting from limits of brain functioning are impairments in social interaction, social communication, and repetitive stereotypical behaviors and interests.

If one does not meet the required criteria for these disabling impairments, that lead to actual limits in functioning in life one does not meet the requirement for a professional diagnosis.

The only place that the criteria for autism exists, is in diagnositic manuals created by the psychiatric profession, that created the term autism and Aspergers to describe behavior in human beings that results from limits in brain functioning.

Without an understanding of the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders, there is no way to determine if someone has the condition. ASD's do not exist without the criteria.

It appears that you may not have seen the criteria that specifies what is disabling about the disorders, so your analysis that logical thinking has anything to do with the disabling aspects of the disorders does not appear to be based on the facts as they exist associated with criteria that describes the impairments.

The ability to think logically is not addressed in any of the diagnostic criteria that specifies impairments that are inherently disabling in ASD's.

An analysis of the "NT world" as you define it, is at best a guess, because there is no way to know for sure who isn't diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders in the general population. There is no requirement for anyone to disclose it.

And some people have learned to hide the symptoms well enough not to be noticed as anything but within the range of odd, that is seen everywhere in the population.

While the term "NT" can be used to describe non-autistic in a rhetorical conversation to describe those that are not labeled with a diagnosis, there is no scientific evidence of typical neurology in the general population.

Many people now use the term "NT" to describe those who are not neurodiverse, within the moving target of what defines neurodiverse, also an invented word that has no clearly defined meaning.

That was my point on the evidenced 30 percent of the population that has traits of autism, however you as everyone else has a right to define the terms "NT" or "neurodiverse" however they want to, because they are not clearly defined terms, that even exist in dictionaries.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

07 May 2012, 9:31 am

Silvervarg wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:


And when did acting logicly become a super human ability...?


Never said it was...I was saying it wasn't

I never said you said it, but in order for you to feel it neccessary to contradict it someone must have said/implyed it, otherwise it's just a random remark, which would be utterly pointless.

I was not contridicting anything you said there...the basis of this thread indicated AS supposedly gives us super human abilities or some crap. You were saying we are by default more logical then neurotypicals figured you were more or less agreeing with the op about it being some special ability. And so I was disagreeing....I don't see whats so utterly pointless about that.

Quote:
Quote:
I never said it did, but since one of the criteria for autism or related is a decrease in interest in social interaction (as far as I know), it's less likely a spectrumite sucumbs to these feelings since they do not relate to the group or its needs. Logical conclusion.

Its not nessisarly a decrease in intrest in social interaction, its difficulties with social interaction....so many of us still desire social interaction but our difficulties with social interaction interfere.

This might be more of an opinion on my part, but from my experience, if we are interested to learn about something, we do learn it, if we don't, then we don't. To simply have a wish/desire to learn, because it might simplyfy things are not enough.

In my case being intrested in something usually does not mean I automatically am able to learn it...I do like to interact with people, like close friends and I like to make friends but no I've never been able to learn to put on some neurotypical act to come off as normal so people don't pick up on my weirdness and treat me like crap over it....and trust me I wanted to and tried as a child when I felt it was the only way. But now I can just stay away from most people, which is what I prefer....less exausting for me.

Quote:
Also having an intrest in social interaction does not indicate one follows mob mentality.

No, again, I did not state such is the case, I said risk is elivated if you identify with the group. (Technicly I said the reversed, but one follows the other.)[/quote]

Ok well it seemed you were implying because people with autism aren't usually as much part of the group they are not as likely to follow mob mentality, but I think that would all depend on the individual. I mean there are plenty of people with AS who want to fit in with neurotypicals.


_________________
We won't go back.


Silvervarg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

07 May 2012, 12:37 pm

aghogday wrote:
The entire demographic of individuals that are measured in the US, the 1 in 88, are 8 year old children in classes for the developmentally disabled. Thirty eight percent of whom are measured as having intellectual disabilities. 80% of individuals with autism spectrum disorders are evidenced as needing support from families or society to survive and 90% are evidenced not to be able to maintain steady employment. The issue of any potential advantage for any one person in logical thinking does not play into these statistics of disability in functioning in life, for the majority of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, measured as such.

You may be the most logically thinking person to walk the earth, however that does not diminish the disabilities of millions of individuals in the world diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.

Irrelevant for the mere reason that if you fill all the lower ends of the criterias (which are not even consistent, it all comes down to the doctor) you'll be labeled as having a disability, no matter what acctual problems you have.

Quote:
I've provided third party evidence that decisions are based and influenced on emotion in human beings, including those individuals that are understood to have the shallowest of external emotion, psychopaths; you have provided no third party evidence to the contrary.

Feel free to quote me where I stated such opinion, I sure can't find it.

Quote:
All forms of professionally diagnosed autism spectrum disorders are considered inherently disabling due to limits in brain function, per medical and legal definition. The impairments resulting from limits of brain functioning are impairments in social interaction, social communication, and repetitive stereotypical behaviors and interests. If one does not meet the required criteria for these disabling impairments, that lead to actual limits in functioning in life one does not meet the requirement for a professional diagnosis. The only place that the criteria for autism exists, is in diagnositic manuals created by the psychiatric profession, that created the term autism and Aspergers to describe behavior in human beings that results from limits in brain functioning. Without an understanding of the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders, there is no way to determine if someone has the condition.

Percived disabilities are the product of the beholder from their view of the surroundings. Without understanding this no one can break free from the notion.

Quote:
ASD's do not exist without the criteria.

This is incorrect, existens is not based on the surroundings ability to describe it. Spectrumites where around before the word came into existance, they where just not recognized as a related group. (Or what ever you want to call it.)

Quote:
It appears that you may not have seen the criteria that specifies what is disabling about the disorders, so your analysis that logical thinking has anything to do with the disabling aspects of the disorders does not appear to be based on the facts as they exist associated with criteria that describes the impairments.

You have the wrong impression.

Quote:
The ability to think logically is not addressed in any of the diagnostic criteria that specifies impairments that are inherently disabling in ASD's.

*Points to answer below the first quote*

Quote:
An analysis of the "NT world" as you define it, is at best a guess, because there is no way to know for sure who isn't diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders in the general population. There is no requirement for anyone to disclose it.

I can't really decide if I should mock this or view it as a genuine (although horribly stu... strange) argument and respond.
You just said that everyone I've ever met could have been on the spectrum and there for my experience counts for nothing...

Quote:
While the term "NT" can be used to describe non-autistic in a rhetorical conversation to describe those that are not labeled with a diagnosis, there is no scientific evidence of typical neurology in the general population.

What? Do you really mean no one has ever taken the time to scan atleast 50% (or more untill a norm pattern could be found) of the worlds population? Man, scientists are getting sloppy aren't they...

Quote:
Many people now use the term "NT" to describe those who are not neurodiverse, within the moving target of what defines neurodiverse, also an invented word that has no clearly defined meaning.

I must again thank you for this random information.

Quote:
That was my point on the evidenced 30 percent of the population that has traits of autism, however you as everyone else has a right to define the terms "NT" or "neurodiverse" however they want to, because they are not clearly defined terms, that even exist in dictionaries.

I still see no point.
And please stop writing every single sentence seperatly, I can baraly make heads or tails of what you're trying to say when you chop it up.

Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not contridicting anything you said there...the basis of this thread indicated AS supposedly gives us super human abilities or some crap. You were saying we are by default more logical then neurotypicals figured you were more or less agreeing with the op about it being some special ability. And so I was disagreeing....I don't see whats so utterly pointless about that.

You disagreed with an unquoted post from five pages ago and expected everyone to get that? Not even I am that optimistic. ^^
Being logical is nothing more than being logical, it starts and end there.

Quote:
In my case being intrested in something usually does not mean I automatically am able to learn it...I do like to interact with people, like close friends and I like to make friends but no I've never been able to learn to put on some neurotypical act to come off as normal so people don't pick up on my weirdness and treat me like crap over it....and trust me I wanted to and tried as a child when I felt it was the only way. But now I can just stay away from most people, which is what I prefer....less exausting for me.

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

Quote:
Ok well it seemed you were implying because people with autism aren't usually as much part of the group they are not as likely to follow mob mentality, but I think that would all depend on the individual. I mean there are plenty of people with AS who want to fit in with neurotypicals.

That was (sort of) exactly what I said, and it's mathematical proven, it's the same principal as evolution theory. AS individuals have a higher chance/risk of not indentifying with a group (this is a part of the diagnose), thus: Less prone to fall into conformity.


_________________
Sing songs. Songs sung. Samsung.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

07 May 2012, 4:37 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
The entire demographic of individuals that are measured in the US, the 1 in 88, are 8 year old children in classes for the developmentally disabled. Thirty eight percent of whom are measured as having intellectual disabilities. 80% of individuals with autism spectrum disorders are evidenced as needing support from families or society to survive and 90% are evidenced not to be able to maintain steady employment. The issue of any potential advantage for any one person in logical thinking does not play into these statistics of disability in functioning in life, for the majority of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, measured as such.

You may be the most logically thinking person to walk the earth, however that does not diminish the disabilities of millions of individuals in the world diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.


Silvervarg wrote:
Irrelevant for the mere reason that if you fill all the lower ends of the criterias (which are not even consistent, it all comes down to the doctor) you'll be labeled as having a disability, no matter what acctual problems you have.


aghogday wrote:
If one is not identified as having an impairment in a major area of life functioning as a result of the impairments identified in each criteria one does not receive a diagnosis at all. It is a mandatory requirement to receive a diagnosis.

In the new DSM5 revised criteria one must be impaired and limited in everyday life functioning as a result of the impairments identified in each criteria to receive a diagnosis. One is not diagnosed if they show no signs of disability in life functioning as a result of the impairments described in the criteria.


Quote:
I've provided third party evidence that decisions are based and influenced on emotion in human beings, including those individuals that are understood to have the shallowest of external emotion, psychopaths; you have provided no third party evidence to the contrary.


Silvervarg wrote:
Feel free to quote me where I stated such opinion, I sure can't find it.


aghogday wrote:
That was my point on logic and emotions, not your opinion. You provided no evidence to refute it.


Quote:
All forms of professionally diagnosed autism spectrum disorders are considered inherently disabling due to limits in brain function, per medical and legal definition. The impairments resulting from limits of brain functioning are impairments in social interaction, social communication, and repetitive stereotypical behaviors and interests. If one does not meet the required criteria for these disabling impairments, that lead to actual limits in functioning in life one does not meet the requirement for a professional diagnosis. The only place that the criteria for autism exists, is in diagnositic manuals created by the psychiatric profession, that created the term autism and Aspergers to describe behavior in human beings that results from limits in brain functioning. Without an understanding of the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders, there is no way to determine if someone has the condition.


Silvervarg wrote:
Percived disabilities are the product of the beholder from their view of the surroundings. Without understanding this no one can break free from the notion.


aghogday wrote:
Per my quote above, no one is professionally diagnosed with an ASD, unless they meet the criteria established by psychiatrists, whom invented the labels of autism spectrum disorders to describe a group of symptoms the psychiatrists identified in the general population. If one is not disabled by the condition in life functioning one does not receive a diagnosis.

The broader autism phenotype is suggested to extend out as far as 30% of the population; if one is not disabled by their symptoms in life functioning, that is where they fit, beyond the mandatory criteria for actual diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders.


Quote:
ASD's do not exist without the criteria.


Silvervarg wrote:
This is incorrect, existens is not based on the surroundings ability to describe it. Spectrumites where around before the word came into existance, they where just not recognized as a related group. (Or what ever you want to call it.)


aghogday wrote:
The symptoms have likely always existed, similiar ones are identified in mice, but without the label provided by the psychiatric profession there is no defined disorder or condition; one would be referred to as whatever society as a whole determines for unusual behavior with pejoratives like nerd, spaz, geek.

Unfortunately the term Aspergers has become a perjorative as well in many areas of society. Using the term "NT", is tit for tat for some in describing the rest of society, that is neither normal or consistent in either neurology or behavior. The effect of the process of neuroplasticity is evidenced to create changes in neurology that vary, per every individual in the population.


Quote:
An analysis of the "NT world" as you define it, is at best a guess, because there is no way to know for sure who isn't diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders in the general population. There is no requirement for anyone to disclose it.


Silvervarg wrote:
I can't really decide if I should mock this or view it as a genuine (although horribly stu... strange) argument and respond.
You just said that everyone I've ever met could have been on the spectrum and there for my experience counts for nothing...


aghogday wrote:
No, I just said an analysis of whom isn't diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders "NT's", is at best a guess, because there is no way for sure to know who isn't diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder


Quote:
While the term "NT" can be used to describe non-autistic in a rhetorical conversation to describe those that are not labeled with a diagnosis, there is no scientific evidence of typical neurology in the general population.


Silvervarg wrote:
What? Do you really mean no one has ever taken the time to scan atleast 50% (or more untill a norm pattern could be found) of the worlds population? Man, scientists are getting sloppy aren't they...


aghogday wrote:
No they haven't, atypical neurology in autism is not even posible to consistently identify with a brain scan".

And, it is not possible to identify the specific changes in neurology that occur on a day to day basis per the proces of neuroplasticity, however the long term impacts of the process of neuroplasticity and the changes that occur in brain structure have been identified through MRI's.

All humans are succeptible to these neurological changes through the process of neuroplasticity depending on genetic and environmental factors. In fact, some of the measured changes in behavior associated with these changes in neurology through the process of neuroplasticity have been associated with behaviors in human beings simliar to clinical features associated with ASD's.


Quote:
Many people now use the term "NT" to describe those who are not neurodiverse, within the moving target of what defines neurodiverse, also an invented word that has no clearly defined meaning.


Silvervarg wrote:
I must again thank you for this random information.


aghogday wrote:
Your welcome, the point is that your definition of NT, is no longer the norm that it was in the Online Community several years ago.


Quote:
That was my point on the evidenced 30 percent of the population that has traits of autism, however you as everyone else has a right to define the terms "NT" or "neurodiverse" however they want to, because they are not clearly defined terms, that even exist in dictionaries.


Silvervarg wrote:
I still see no point.
And please stop writing every single sentence seperatly, I can baraly make heads or tails of what you're trying to say when you chop it up.


aghogday wrote:
It is specifically related to the previous point, of how pervasive atypical neurology moves out into the general population, if one considers atypical neurology to be the source of autistic traits.

And, autistic traits are the tip of the iceberg, introverts are actually evidenced in brain scans as having structural differences in neurology, per the pleasure centers of the brain as the relate to dopamine sensitivity. The process of neuroplasticity makes typical neurology impossible, per any human being.

I would write much longer paragraphs, however many people no longer have the patience to read more than two or three lines at a time; that is a cultural wide phenomenon, not an autistic specific one. It is also evidenced as a result of the process of neuroplasticity.

As a result of continous short bursts of information stimuli in culture, human neurology has changed through the process of neuroplasticity to adapt to this environmental change. The result is evidenced lower attention span. More than three lines at a time results in discomfort for many in the population.

And more than three, three sentence paragraphs result in discomfort for many as well. I far exceed that limit in potentially providing discomfort to others, but that is part of my behavior as one diagnosed with an ASD.

I feel free to indulge in it here on this site, but I usually can manage a three or four line limit for a paragraph.



Silvervarg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 8:00 am

aghogday wrote:
Completly unreadable post.

Fix your quotes please, I'm not even going to begin decrypting that thing.


_________________
Sing songs. Songs sung. Samsung.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:19 pm

I think you are totally right. Neurotypicals do not follow logic but rather what is socially acceptable. I could give you example after example. Take for example people that ride Harley Davidson motorcycles. A real biker does not wear a helmet. Even though there is a mountain of evidence supporting the safety of motorcycle helmets a biker will not wear a helmet because it is not socially acceptable to do so. Of course this has changed only because the law requires a biker to wear a helmet so bikers do not have a choice and now wearing a helmet is mainstream.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:32 pm

Silvervarg wrote:

Sweetleaf wrote:
I was not contridicting anything you said there...the basis of this thread indicated AS supposedly gives us super human abilities or some crap. You were saying we are by default more logical then neurotypicals figured you were more or less agreeing with the op about it being some special ability. And so I was disagreeing....I don't see whats so utterly pointless about that.

You disagreed with an unquoted post from five pages ago and expected everyone to get that? Not even I am that optimistic. ^^
Being logical is nothing more than being logical, it starts and end there.

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.

Quote:
In my case being intrested in something usually does not mean I automatically am able to learn it...I do like to interact with people, like close friends and I like to make friends but no I've never been able to learn to put on some neurotypical act to come off as normal so people don't pick up on my weirdness and treat me like crap over it....and trust me I wanted to and tried as a child when I felt it was the only way. But now I can just stay away from most people, which is what I prefer....less exausting for me.

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.

Quote:
Ok well it seemed you were implying because people with autism aren't usually as much part of the group they are not as likely to follow mob mentality, but I think that would all depend on the individual. I mean there are plenty of people with AS who want to fit in with neurotypicals.

That was (sort of) exactly what I said, and it's mathematical proven, it's the same principal as evolution theory. AS individuals have a higher chance/risk of not indentifying with a group (this is a part of the diagnose), thus: Less prone to fall into conformity.


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.


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:37 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
I think you are totally right. Neurotypicals do not follow logic but rather what is socially acceptable. I could give you example after example.

:roll:, right I am sure this applies to every single neurotypical......people in general for some reason try to follow what is socially acceptable not just neurotypicals.

Take for example people that ride Harley Davidson motorcycles. A real biker does not wear a helmet. Even though there is a mountain of evidence supporting the safety of motorcycle helmets a biker will not wear a helmet because it is not socially acceptable to do so. Of course this has changed only because the law requires a biker to wear a helmet so bikers do not have a choice and now wearing a helmet is mainstream.


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.


_________________
We won't go back.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:37 pm

But autistic people are more likely to be the rugged individualist.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:40 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
But autistic people are more likely to be the rugged individualist.


I would think that would be more true of maybe people with Schizoid PD, since they are more likely to lack the desire for social interaction, and from what I gather most people with AS/Autism a lot of times do want to have interaction with people but struggle with it, which might lead to rejection.


_________________
We won't go back.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:44 pm

of course initially there will be rejection until the autistic behavior becomes mainstream.



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 12:46 pm

androbot2084 wrote:
of course initially there will be rejection until the autistic behavior becomes mainstream.


Why would it become mainstream if most people aren't wired that way? see to me a logical idea would be to try and make society more open to different ways of brain functioning so that peoples differences can be respected instead of looked down upon. But going overboard and trying to force how our minds work on people and claiming absolute superiority seems to be a good way of throwing logic out the window.


_________________
We won't go back.


androbot2084
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 2:28 pm

Because once the autistic behavior becomes mainstream it is no longer considered autistic but rather socially acceptable. At that point the autistic finds a new way to deviate from society.

For example before World War 2 belief in the possibility of space travel to the Moon was not considered to be socially acceptable. Nowadays most neurotypicals regard it as technologically feasible but not from an economic point of view.

Autistic people can be regarded as the pioneers of our society. Whenever technology is first introduced the autistic is jeered until the technology becomes socially acceptable.

One of our greatest tragedies is that neurotypical doctors refuse to prescribe i-pad communication devices for autistics who are unable to communicate. Even though there is a mountain of evidence, neurotypicals only go by what is socially acceptable.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 2:31 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
.

Quote:
Emotions cannot be used as arguments they are feelings not words, they underly what motivates the decision making process and influence whatever logic/rationality is intended and perceived from the decision making process.

Incorrect, the following example proves this: "I will take this lottory ticket, because my gut tells me it's a winner." A person basing decision on emotions will go for a gut feeling rather than a statistical (and there for logical) option.



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.

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 cost0benefit 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 am using the term NT just for convenience. I agree with ahogday that it doesn't have any actual clinical meaning. My only point is that this perceived dichotomy between logical decision makers and emotional decision makers is just an illusion. People use both logic and emotion to make decisions and the outliers are extremely rare (more rare than autism). You use both. I use both.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

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

08 May 2012, 2:34 pm

Silvervarg wrote:
aghogday wrote:
Completly unreadable post.

Fix your quotes please, I'm not even going to begin decrypting that thing.


What was it that you weren't able to read?

All the quotes are identified with an author except for my quotes that you didn't identify with an author from the previous posts, that you responded to.

All your quotes are labeled as they were from the previous posts, and my answers to those quotes are identified labeled with my username.



aghogday wrote:
The entire demographic of individuals that are measured in the US, the 1 in 88, are 8 year old children in classes for the developmentally disabled. Thirty eight percent of whom are measured as having intellectual disabilities. 80% of individuals with autism spectrum disorders are evidenced as needing support from families or society to survive and 90% are evidenced not to be able to maintain steady employment. The issue of any potential advantage for any one person in logical thinking does not play into these statistics of disability in functioning in life, for the majority of individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, measured as such.

You may be the most logically thinking person to walk the earth, however that does not diminish the disabilities of millions of individuals in the world diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders.


Silvervarg wrote:
Irrelevant for the mere reason that if you fill all the lower ends of the criterias (which are not even consistent, it all comes down to the doctor) you'll be labeled as having a disability, no matter what acctual problems you have.


aghogday wrote:
If one is not identified as having an impairment in a major area of life functioning as a result of the impairments identified in each criteria one does not receive a diagnosis at all. It is a mandatory requirement to receive a diagnosis.

In the new DSM5 revised criteria one must be impaired and limited in everyday life functioning as a result of the impairments identified in each criteria to receive a diagnosis. One is not diagnosed if they show no signs of disability in life functioning as a result of the impairments described in the criteria.


Quote:
I've provided third party evidence that decisions are based and influenced on emotion in human beings, including those individuals that are understood to have the shallowest of external emotion, psychopaths; you have provided no third party evidence to the contrary.


Silvervarg wrote:
Feel free to quote me where I stated such opinion, I sure can't find it.


aghogday wrote:
That was my point on logic and emotions, not your opinion. You provided no evidence to refute it.


Quote:
All forms of professionally diagnosed autism spectrum disorders are considered inherently disabling due to limits in brain function, per medical and legal definition. The impairments resulting from limits of brain functioning are impairments in social interaction, social communication, and repetitive stereotypical behaviors and interests. If one does not meet the required criteria for these disabling impairments, that lead to actual limits in functioning in life one does not meet the requirement for a professional diagnosis. The only place that the criteria for autism exists, is in diagnositic manuals created by the psychiatric profession, that created the term autism and Aspergers to describe behavior in human beings that results from limits in brain functioning. Without an understanding of the diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorders, there is no way to determine if someone has the condition.


Silvervarg wrote:
Percived disabilities are the product of the beholder from their view of the surroundings. Without understanding this no one can break free from the notion.


aghogday wrote:
Per my quote above, no one is professionally diagnosed with an ASD, unless they meet the criteria established by psychiatrists, whom invented the labels of autism spectrum disorders to describe a group of symptoms the psychiatrists identified in the general population. If one is not disabled by the condition in life functioning one does not receive a diagnosis.

The broader autism phenotype is suggested to extend out as far as 30% of the population; if one is not disabled by their symptoms in life functioning, that is where they fit, beyond the mandatory criteria for actual diagnosis of autism spectrum disorders.


Quote:
ASD's do not exist without the criteria.


Silvervarg wrote:
This is incorrect, existens is not based on the surroundings ability to describe it. Spectrumites where around before the word came into existance, they where just not recognized as a related group. (Or what ever you want to call it.)


aghogday wrote:
The symptoms have likely always existed, similiar ones are identified in mice, but without the label provided by the psychiatric profession there is no defined disorder or condition; one would be referred to as whatever society as a whole determines for unusual behavior with pejoratives like nerd, spaz, geek.

Unfortunately the term Aspergers has become a perjorative as well in many areas of society. Using the term "NT", is tit for tat for some in describing the rest of society, that is neither normal or consistent in either neurology or behavior. The effect of the process of neuroplasticity is evidenced to create changes in neurology that vary, per every individual in the population.


Quote:
An analysis of the "NT world" as you define it, is at best a guess, because there is no way to know for sure who isn't diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders in the general population. There is no requirement for anyone to disclose it.


Silvervarg wrote:
I can't really decide if I should mock this or view it as a genuine (although horribly stu... strange) argument and respond.
You just said that everyone I've ever met could have been on the spectrum and there for my experience counts for nothing...


aghogday wrote:
No, I just said an analysis of whom isn't diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders "NT's", is at best a guess, because there is no way for sure to know who isn't diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder


Quote:
While the term "NT" can be used to describe non-autistic in a rhetorical conversation to describe those that are not labeled with a diagnosis, there is no scientific evidence of typical neurology in the general population.


Silvervarg wrote:
What? Do you really mean no one has ever taken the time to scan atleast 50% (or more untill a norm pattern could be found) of the worlds population? Man, scientists are getting sloppy aren't they...


aghogday wrote:
No they haven't, atypical neurology in autism is not even posible to consistently identify with a brain scan".

And, it is not possible to identify the specific changes in neurology that occur on a day to day basis per the proces of neuroplasticity, however the long term impacts of the process of neuroplasticity and the changes that occur in brain structure have been identified through MRI's.

All humans are succeptible to these neurological changes through the process of neuroplasticity depending on genetic and environmental factors. In fact, some of the measured changes in behavior associated with these changes in neurology through the process of neuroplasticity have been associated with behaviors in human beings simliar to clinical features associated with ASD's.


Quote:
Many people now use the term "NT" to describe those who are not neurodiverse, within the moving target of what defines neurodiverse, also an invented word that has no clearly defined meaning.


Silvervarg wrote:
I must again thank you for this random information.


aghogday wrote:
Your welcome, the point is that your definition of NT, is no longer the norm that it was in the Online Community several years ago.


Quote:
That was my point on the evidenced 30 percent of the population that has traits of autism, however you as everyone else has a right to define the terms "NT" or "neurodiverse" however they want to, because they are not clearly defined terms, that even exist in dictionaries.


Silvervarg wrote:
I still see no point.
And please stop writing every single sentence seperatly, I can baraly make heads or tails of what you're trying to say when you chop it up.


aghogday wrote:
It is specifically related to the previous point, of how pervasive atypical neurology moves out into the general population, if one considers atypical neurology to be the source of autistic traits.

And, autistic traits are the tip of the iceberg, introverts are actually evidenced in brain scans as having structural differences in neurology, per the pleasure centers of the brain as the relate to dopamine sensitivity. The process of neuroplasticity makes typical neurology impossible, per any human being.

I would write much longer paragraphs, however many people no longer have the patience to read more than two or three lines at a time; that is a cultural wide phenomenon, not an autistic specific one. It is also evidenced as a result of the process of neuroplasticity.

As a result of continous short bursts of information stimuli in culture, human neurology has changed through the process of neuroplasticity to adapt to this environmental change. The result is evidenced lower attention span. More than three lines at a time results in discomfort for many in the population.

And more than three, three sentence paragraphs result in discomfort for many as well. I far exceed that limit in potentially providing discomfort to others, but that is part of my behavior as one diagnosed with an ASD.

I feel free to indulge in it here on this site, but I usually can manage a three or four line limit for a paragraph.