High Social Status

Post Reply New Topic

Understanding how things are working in your environment can be critical to survival. Nothing else need be assumed.

I see the group of ASD folks here to generally be an aggregate of individuals who come to gain and share information.
There is obviously several types and levels of socialization that happens here between the individuals, but so far nothing at all like the hive-mind, and there's no individual/position or group of people here that I hope to emulate.

On the other side of the coin, the typical NT doesn't ever let go of the hive-mind, and their attachments to identity and hierarchy, except perhaps when they are on their death bed and realize that none of it was real.
The NTs seem to mostly stay on "autopilot", with the algorithms running in their subconscious to help them intuitively filter everything through identity and navigate hierarchies. The basis for their reality lies in the shared beliefs of other people, real or not.

Social status is essentially a reflection of the need to be accepted by the social "in group". For most people their self-esteem is dependent on what they perceive others think of them. Needing social status is a little bit like being hooked on an addictive substance, it provides a temporary relief by falling into line with social conformity and visualising yourself in terms of "social success" based on perceived norms and values of your respective social "in-group". Human beings are biologically programmed this way. We are social creatures.

Those of you not conforming to the norms of social status may want to read Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs and the ultimate human need for "self-actualisation" or desire for personal self-fulfillment. The path for self-actualisation does not (according to Maslow) need to follow standard progression. Infact self-actualised people don't seek others approval and are focused on their own individual development and personal growth as humans. This does not mean you lose compassion for other people but you accept differences and ignorance in society are normal part of life. Just like a forest has many different plants and animals, human society is made up of different diverse range of people. You accept there is actually "no status" just diversity. The former is a delusional state of mind.

Sorry, that was irony. I mean that some people who claim to understand social standing actually understand it very little, and they choose to ignore fairly obvious things in order to denigrate it.

It gets even worse when people generalize about NTs. Try saying "some but not all."

Eh, my response is pretty much the same nonetheless. If they dont understand it... but are fine with it being that way... it may be indeed true that they dont NEED it. You see so many people everywhere going to soooooo much trouble to understand as much of it as possible because of that desperate need, but there's always those that just... dont.

The sort that genuinely prefers to just be away from others definitely is the best example though of the person that literally just doesnt need any of it.

I've forgotten where I was going with this. Not that this is a surprise. Might come to me a bit later. Maybe.

Why don't you go on to explain your own understanding of social standing, as well as those things you think are obvious that are being ignored?
I'm trying to determine your point if you had one.

I will admit to having a strong desire for academic status, to have a job that by its very nature demonstrates that I am intelligent and competent, however, this is more for my own sake than so I can laud it over others. I want to be able to feel proud of myself for the work I do, and I am largely disinterested in the opinions of other people, especially strangers.

I explained most of it in my earlier posts. I don't expect to have much impact on people who already think they know everything, but maybe I can do something for the people reading this thread who still remain open to new information.

Attachment IS a biological need.

I think the semantics are off -- what this basically says is pretty much everyone simply would like to be treated with respect and like they have inherent value.

That's a very basic, simple concept that I think any living creature needs in order not to feel like life is sh!tty for them -- even animals living in a group.

It's not so much about "high social status" or being higher than anyone else, it's more about not being treated with basic disrespect, any one person.

Attachment = a sense of connection to other people.
Social status = where one fits in the power structure of the hierarchy.

They're two completely different things. One can be at the very top of the hierarchical pyramid and have absolutely no attachment whatsoever, in fact that may be the rule more than the exception. Likewise, a person can feel attachment to other people and have virtually no social status at all.

jrjones is saying what I was saying/thinking.

For instance all the threads and posts about NTs being this and that awful thing in comparison to people on the spectrum. The people who join into those threads are bonding together in an in-group that is poo pooing their outgroup-NTs, which might I say, even have a name that I find derogatory but I used it because it's faster than non-aspie. It's an -ism. I used to think that wp would not have sexism, racism, etc but I was wrong. This sort of thing, when I have to think about it, it seems I must only become amused when it's about disdaining 'socialness'.

I do think schizoids probably meet the 'I don't need socialness at all' status the best, although even among them there seems to be a general consensus that those people are just much better at hiding things from themselves. Yeah, the schizoid forums? Not very active :-p


Formalized social structures like government, structures of companies, etc, seems quite clear to me to be known to be artificial to NTs. That's why things like 'Take back Wallstreet' and anarchists exist, and wildly different political compasses. There are even some people who don't like the idea of 'family' as a unit, and plenty of people who see that family is also a construct, and they aren't on the spectrum. So yes, while there's definitely heirarchical structure, it's by no means accepted by all. It is also probably best thought of as a separate thing from individual, everyday interactions with people even though the one arises from the other, because those 'higher order' structures can be changed, while things like wanting your mom and dad (if you have an identity for yourself and others at all) to approve of you and love you, can't be changed.

That's why there are working-terms for studies like this one (there's a word for working-term, hell if I remember it). They define the term they use at the outset. If that term isn't defined the way that is generally used, people get all confused.

Operational definition, that's the word.

I gained no new information from your earlier posts. I asked you for new information, yet you're supplying none.
Why is it that you want to have impact on people? Exactly what impact is that?

Right. The expectation of not being violated by other individuals does not require or imply status or hierarchy, EXCEPT when you are already embedded within a hierarchal construct.
Many of us would prefer not to be embedded within one.

I think you are correct.
There is a significant percentage of psychopaths and those solidly on the psychopathic spectrum occupying top positions in hierarchy. This supports part of what you are saying, and the other part is supported logically by the difference in definitions between "gaming" for positions in structures, and "bonding" as an upgraded form of communication.