Is it really lack of social intuition???

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think Aspie theory of mind is defective or even different. I suspect that Aspie theory of mind works just the same as NT theory of mind and just as well. I think everybody uses their own neurology as a model. The thing is, when an Aspie uses their own neurology as a model when interacting with NT's ("How would I react if somebody said this to me") it will often be wrong. It will be right when interacting with other Aspies, but how often does that happen out in the world? (Unless you live in Silicon Valley).

NTs do the same thing you do. It's just that the odds of being right are much higher because the NT neurology is so widely shared. But there are many threads on here of what happens when NTs use theory of mind when interacting with Aspies and run up against the different neurology and so get it wrong. All those times when somebody posts "People thought I was angry with them but I wasn't angry at all, I was just thinking". It's a mis-read. The thing is, there are so many more NTs than Aspies that the NTs will rarely run up against the wall of different neurology and the Aspies will constantly run up against it. So both groups can have equally effective theory of mind but the catch is it only works on neurologies similar to your own, which puts Aspies at a statistical disadvantage.

I think the reason they say it is a lack of empathy or theory of mind is because aspies tend to act in a way that, if someone acted that way with them, they probably wouldn't like it all that much. For example, if someone lectured them for a long time on a topic that isn't their special interest in a situation where one wouldn't necessarily expect it (like at a party), I don't think anyone would be so keen on that. Or if someone had weird body language. They probably wouldn't know what to make of that behaviour any better than an NT would. So either ppl with AS don't understand how other ppl feel or they're unable to place themselves in another person's position. And that might go for other aspies as well. Sure, everybody is unique, but that is what social customs are for. To get along even with different ppl. I don't think it's about any kind of essential intuition. I mean, the whole reason ppl like sociopaths and scam artists exist is that ppl are very instinctive creatures but not necessarily all that intuitive. So it's more about human instincts and since everybody has those, despite their communication skills, that's why aspies don't necessarily get along any better with other aspies.

Although you raise some good points, I disagree.

Probably not to the extent that you seem to be assuming.

Indeed, and the same is true for non autistic people. Non autistic peoples’ ToM is highly flexible, facilitating productive intuitive and/or reckoning based predictions about the reactions of others (to a stimulus) even where the person guessing the reaction would themselves react very differently to the same stimulus.

Further, the skill you are referring to is actually quite an advanced one. Typically developing children already demonstrate significant ToM skills and competencies before the kind of “sympathetic empathy” you refer to is sufficiently developed to produce reliably productive results.

Very young children are actually neurologically quite different to adults (even where sex is the same), so significant differences in neurology is not sufficient to prevent ToM being productively employed.

If ToM were based on consulting one’s own neurology to the extent that you seem to assume, it would not be plausible for person A to be given a stimulus and to accurately predict that person B would respond one way while another neurologically similar person (person C) would respond entirely differently. Person A would simply guess whatever they would do, so would everyone else.

Not only do different people (despite similar underlying neurology) manifest diverse reactions to the same stimulus, they also (with a productive degree of reliability) predict diverse reactions. In other words ToM produces results that cannot be derived from simply consulting one’s own neurology to figure out how one would respond themselves, then extrapolating that to others.

There are a variety of reasons for this, however, in many instances, differences in neurology are only indirectly implicated as initial causes of behavioral differences that interfere with ToM tasks/functions.


In my experience and observation, it is very common for such situations to not be plausibly explainable relying on the model you are representing.

Quite often, the person who has misread the person with AS, cannot see any reason for the person with AS to be angry. Often these incidents include the mis-reader either asking what has made the person with AS angry, or even the mis-reader themselves being upset or annoyed because they cannot see any reasonable grounds for the anger.

This is not plausible if your model is correct. If your model was correct, the mis-reader would consult their own neurology and see no cause for anger, and so would not misread the person with AS as being angry.

It is very common for people to misread those with AS as being angry when the mis-reader themselves cannot imagine any reason for such anger, and if the “reader” relied primarily on consulting their own neurology to see how they’d feel in the same circumstances, then they would not guess “angry” in cases where they cannot see any reason why anyone would be angry.



The problem with this is that we know very well that ToM can work fairly effectively across significantly different neurologies (such as a toddler of one biological sex using ToM effectively to predict the response of an adult of the other biological sex), and can fall down somewhat when applied between people of materially similar neurology, but different cultures.

All awesome insightful posts, and yet I'm still puzzled by this question.

Bluerose, welcome aboard! I think that charmers override people's intuitions. When you question a victim, they usually say they saw some red lights at the beginning but explained them away.

Janissy, but how do you explain then that Aspies can't stand other Aspies' poor reciprocity, as Bluerose and I claim?

Ruveyn, are you calling me a bad Anthropologist, then?

pandd, an NT concludes "anger" in that example - basing themselves on the observation of body language, not drawing from their ToM. That's why they say "you LOOK angry" and not "I imagine you must be angry". But you're right, it beats me how my siblings could read our parents' hidden motivations like open books when we were toddlers, and it took ME 4 decades to start understanding those... And while my siblings could always manipulate me (meaning their ToM was effective in reading an Aspie), I was never able to manipulate anyone, Aspie or NT (my father is Aspie and that doesn't make me more able to manipulate him or read him).

Good Lord, this is a very complex subject, only the bravest will remain on this thread!

The going gets tough, the tough get going.

It's like I've said a few times, theory of mind is built on practical experience that flows from a behavioral fast feedback loop from sensory input - eyes, primarily - to gestured response - again, eyes in particular, face generally, and body language is built a few layers deeply. The infant responds the right way, is reinforced the right way, and develops a normal theory of mind as a result.

We - aspies - don't. The fast feedback loop is absent or misconfigured. Yes, we feel the same on the inside, but the inside and the outside don't follow the normal topology.

Do you mean that Aspies don't get to consolidate a ToM at all, because we're poor at the reciprocity dynamics (action - feedback - adjusting of new action as per feedback received - feedback) and therefore don't have any lessons learned to store in our intuitive memory? Could well be...

It's funny, I can determine the feelings and emotions people display in pictures and movies, as well as figure out the social situations in filmed media like the next person.

Why can't I do it in person? Why can't I interact in person with people I don't know? With those I know, why can I barely interact at that?

If it were just "social intuition", I wouldn't be able to pick it up in movies and stuff, even ones I haven't seen before, or even seeing other people interacting in person (I can do this if the environment isn't overwhelming with noise and visual stimuli).

It confuses me.

You probably can't multitask, like me? I'm either acting or observing, can't do both at the same time.

It would then be primarily a sensory-perception disorder rather than a social and communicative one (these things would just be a side-effect of the primary problem, which is distorted sensory perceptions of the world), which has its supporters.

I recall a study where most individuals with an ASD immediately dropped down 50% in ability when given a second task, whereas the "normal" controls didn't drop in functioning at all.

Perhaps all of these "senses" just equate to a cumulative drop in functioning; eye contact is a sense, plus the million and three others coming in when you open your eyes and look around, and since many of these can't be predicted, like a blank wall can, enter "inability".

I think that's very possible, I know that my social abilities drop enormeously when I have to multitask them with other activities.

Not just "poor at" the reciprocal thing - it doesn't exist. We can simulate it, given time for a little thought, but the choices that are needed along the way don't make for good outcomes.

Anyway, there's a rhythm thing in the response loop - if an acceptable response takes too long then trust fails - from the NTs viewpoint, that is.

From a skype chat I had last night with someone:

Me: Remember Robert?
He: Yeah, I never liked the guy, always stayed clear from him.
Me: Why, what's wrong with him?
He: Nothing. But I don't give a chance to people who don't look you in the eye.
Me:

Certainly.

Not exactly, because ToM skills include the abilities to infer things about the minds of others, and this entails rather than excludes inferences from non verbal cues such as body language.
I would suggest that if a population of entirely AS people were constituted, and a non AS baby was raised from infancy in that environment, that child would excel at ToM within that population.

I don't think it's either. NTs don't have it either. I mean, try asking them why they do something the way they do-they give the same answer we do. "It's just why I do it."

We get upset over something they don't understand and they just look at us, they can compare things they get upset over to us no better than we can to them.

Is there really such thing as intuition? Or is it just luck that you happen to interpret something correctly once in a while?

I find it quite humorous... the whole idea. Many males in general, when a female is upset, will not pick up on whether or not she wants comfort, whether she wants it fixed, whether she is just venting, or if she needs time alone. I'm not picking on males one bit, as I have the instinct often to try to fix the problem, and that is usually what they try to do first.

Look at how many arguments people have over misunderstandings in general, anywhere you go. It doesn't matter AS or NT, they don't get one another all of the time either.

How can there even be a "theory of mind" type of thing at all, when no one can possibly know what another person is thinking at all times. There is always so much arguing, fighting, debating... over little things. Emotional things, there is usually MORE fighting over, because there is no real thought process behind it.

How is it that we are told we lack these things, when they do as well? I mean, if we were the only ones lacking it, why would we have to be asked all of the time "what do you want?" "what do you mean by that?", while they are asking one another the same exact things all of the time.

I really see absolutely no difference in our behaviors vs. theirs. We just might not care quite as much about trying to figure it out either at times, or we wait for them to flat out tell us what they want.... which is often why NTs argue-they don't wait for that direct answer, they try from the start whatever they think might work, and it's not always the right way to handle a situation either.

The ONLY difference I've noticed, is I'm more likely to flat out say, "Well, I really can't fully relate to what you are going through, but I've been in a similar situation and this is what I did." Whereas the NT will go into some automode and pretend they've been through the same exact thing and do what they would like someone to do for them.

Me, personally, I would like advice and help (after I've calmed from whatever has happened), so that is what I offer. Some NTs do the same thing because that is what they would want. Some NTs go into auto hugging/comforting. It all depends on the person, and we all react as we would want someone to do for us.

In the sense the word is being used in this context (a skill), yes.

I think that a skill on the part of most people is a better explanation than universally bad luck on our part.


Because ToM is does not predict or require that anyone know what anyone is thinking all of the time. It’s a skill so it is fallible, peoples’ skill varies, and people are better at applying the skill in some contexts than they are in others.

The rational is that while there are variances within the population, we are both outliers on this skill set, and experience impairment that is correlated to this. If you consider hearing, you will probably agree that even though infallible hearing is not a typical human trait, we can still sensibly categorize some peoples’ hearing as impaired/lacking/etc.

anxiety, ToM is about the more general "figuring out" of humans, it doesn't relate so much to specific situations. Eg: when we were little, my siblings, when mom said: "Be good" knew instinctively that humans have subjective ideas of what "being good" is and so they were "good" in ways that'd keep mom happy with them (such as hiding from her truths she wouldn't like). I, on the contrary, lacking ToM, interpreted her words literally, and was "good" in a moral sense, which made mom rageful at me every time. All 3 of us inherited $0, yet my siblings are nowadays very rich and I'm practically in the streets.

pandd, how come then I'm able to infer from body language without problem, yet my ToM is horrible?