Autistic Philosophy

Page 3 of 3 [ 42 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3

Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 639
Location: Atlanta, Ga

12 Oct 2005, 11:02 pm

Hey realax man.
I'm totally digging your thread. I understood what you were saying, and this is something I have spent most of my life pondering.
I guess my point is that once you realize that everyone has their own subjective views, then you can start to look at your own views with an objective eye. I think people often stop short of this and just say "tomayto tomato"

_________________
"I was made to love magic, all its wonder to know, but you all lost that magic many many years ago."
N Drake

MindOfOrderedChaos
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Sep 2005
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 751
Location: New Zealand

13 Oct 2005, 12:03 am

I wasn't annoyed with you spacemonkey just with Danlo quoting me and saying you are wrong pretty much and saying this is how I view things and then he goes and repeats a very similiar idea to ones I have and im not oppsed to what his view is on things in my Idea of things I see how differen't views can both be right at the same time i can also understand how he may not even have a differen't view just a missunderstanding that makes him think that he really does have a differen't view.

_________________
Unfortunately being human is a genetic disorder, and ultimately fatal.

danlo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,079
Location: Western Australia

13 Oct 2005, 12:18 am

I may be grossly misunderstanding what you are trying to say, but I am not misunderstanding what you have written. I can't try and guess what you are trying to say, if you haven't written it. Noone can. If you read my post, read it THOROUGHLY to the tiniest detail, you would laugh at this post of yours. Take it literally. Let me take fragments from my post, that you seem to have missed.

danlo wrote:

Where have I told you that your view of the world is wrong? Indeed, my philosophy says that yours is as valid as mine, and I have not acted in contradiction to it once. I have merely been telling you where my view disagrees with yours.

Now go back and read my other posts. READ them. Let me take some more fragments from previous posts.

danlo wrote:

1. I agree, that society functions on a foundation of shared assumptions. But I have to disagree that egocentricity is a clash of mental models.
2. Personally, I think you're wrong about what philosophy is.
3. That's a bad assumption to make.
4. JB814, you seem to have missed the point.

"I disagree"; "Personally, I think"; "That's a bad assumption to make"; "You seem to have missed the point". I use these, and then proceed to explain what I think, how what I think differs. That's all it is. Explaining and pointing out where my view differs. Where, in my posts, have I said that I am right, only I am right, and you're wrong? I know full well that I could be the one that's wrong, and I put that in my posts.

MindOfOrderedChaos wrote:

You respond to people challenging your ideas with an argument.

Well by god, how else is there to respond? Is this an intellectual debate or is it not? Debates are made from argument and counter-argument. How do you want me to respond?

Now, I have gone to great pains to get rid of all my personal feelings towards you, in making my posts. I don't have the right to attack you, because, much as I think you are misunderstanding everything I write, you obviously think the same, and haven't attacked me. So rest assured, there has been NO personal attacks from me in any of my posts in this thread. I vented them all to another poor sap, to save you the burden. From my perspective, all the insults seem to be one way; coming from you! I'm not going to take the time to explain where they lie, I do not dwell on such things. Just take Spacemonkey's advice, and try to examine everything objectively.

danlo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,079
Location: Western Australia

13 Oct 2005, 12:34 am

MindOfOrderedChaos wrote:

Where did I say you were wrong? What I said was, your view was already commonly accepted! CHECK MY FIRST POST. What I was saying, was that your view wasn't unique. Even though you view through an autism-affected lens, you came to the same view that so-called NT's already believe in. And that, is where you no doubt are drawing your anger from. You are not unique, you are the same as everyone else. DEAL WITH IT.

danlo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,079
Location: Western Australia

13 Oct 2005, 12:45 am

MindOfOrderedChaos wrote:

Hopefully that is a clearer explination of this idea and why I brought it up. I am considering wheither this thread could be successful if i tryed again later. But I think I am going to have to wait a while for the fog to clear from your lens about the ideas I am trying get accross. You have no idea how frustrated I am that I am unable to communicate my ideas and my attempts to communicate them accross are picking at things that were never intended.

See, its exactly what I said it was! And is my philosophy as opposed to yours in this area vastly different? YES! Its almost the opposite. Let me quote my post where I responded to this.

danlo wrote:

Autism is merely why we're different, but its no big deal. NOONE approaches everything the same way. I don't see why autism has to be made into THE reason regarding everything. Think of someone who was brought up catholic, someone who was brought up atheist, someone who was brought up agnostic. How different would their views on the world be, regardless whether they be NT or autistic? The catholic might see the divine hand, where the atheist will see mere chance. Or another example, two men look at a rose, one cries and one smiles. The man who cries had a garden of finest roses, and only this one remains. The man who smiles was once blind, and beholds the flower for the first time. Our lens through which we perceive the world, is an eyelid which imprints what we see. This lens, this eyelid, is composed of beliefs, traditions, experiences. Systems through which we view the world and interpret what we see.

Give the emphasis on why we're different a rest. Fact is, we're no different to the rest of the world, in that we are different. Autism is just a word people have given to a collection of differences, so that they can see the world in black and white, instead of a spectrum. The idea "autism" allows people to categorize people into groups, normal and autistic. Autism is not who we are, it doesn't define us, it doesn't represent us. We don't HAVE autism; autism is not a part of us, either. We are who we are, why isn't that enough? It is a meaningless word, which like all words, allows people to blind themselves to reality. How can any one word encompass the millions of individual people, individual hopes and dreams, abilities and inabilities? How blindly, do we allow and perpetuate this system, and accept this label of limitation? Words can be powerful, but because they delimit rather than show the interconnection of all things, it is a poor system for representing something as complex and myriad as humanity.

jb814
Deinonychus

Joined: 3 Aug 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 309
Location: Glasgow Scotland

13 Oct 2005, 3:44 am

Quote:

a) It's why I hoped this thread would answer some of my doubts, because my comminication skills are bad also.
b) I'm sick of the standard "one size fits all" approaches that say there is an answer there, you just need to find out how to use it. Maybe when dx is far behind me and I have a much better understanding of my own workings I might be able to, in the meantime I want an outlook that takes where I am into account.
So please don't stop.

spacemonkey
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 639
Location: Atlanta, Ga

13 Oct 2005, 9:02 am

Allright so here is my theory, which so far I have never really heard any one argue before.

Danlo you said that Autism is just one particular way that people are different. Basically that it is just another lens of a different color.
Not only that, you and others imply that the lens is more opaque than most. Reducing one's ability to see the opinions of others.

Quote:

The way I see it, autistics are lacking in lenses. We see the world more directly and objectively. It is difficult to form social connections because these connections are based on a shared set of lenses.

_________________
"I was made to love magic, all its wonder to know, but you all lost that magic many many years ago."
N Drake

danlo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Mar 2005
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,079
Location: Western Australia

13 Oct 2005, 10:42 am

Yeah, pretty much. If you think of all the imprints on the lens as a thumprint, then I consider autism a big fat smudged thumbprint on the lens. Just one more thing affecting our view of the world.
Space, I do agree with you, actually. We lack some imprints on our lenses that are possessed by NT's. But I think we have our own imprints, that are just as clouding as those of NT's. Instead of an imprinting based on social mores, its an imprint based on our lack of understanding them.
I agree, for some its difficult to form connections because of the difference in our lenses. Myself, I find my autistic lens is condusive to making connections. Connections via internet are much harder to make and maintain, because I communicate more, and my flaws are more apparent. Can you explain further how it is you see that autistics are lacking in lenses, and are more objective?

spacemonkey
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 28 Aug 2004
Age: 49
Gender: Male
Posts: 639
Location: Atlanta, Ga

13 Oct 2005, 8:13 pm

I don't really know how to explain it. Maybe it is nothing more than a hunch.
A few of my clues are; the tendency to overanalyze things, depersonalization, taking things literally, feeling dissociated from the body.
These are all things that suggest to me a tendency toward a more objective point of view. It seems to me that an increasingly objective state of mind could account for both the strengths and weaknesses of autism.
In addition, I think that this objectivity is a defining characteristic of what it means to be human, it just seems more exagerated on the autistic spectrum.

_________________
"I was made to love magic, all its wonder to know, but you all lost that magic many many years ago."
N Drake

jb814
Deinonychus

Joined: 3 Aug 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 309
Location: Glasgow Scotland

15 Oct 2005, 12:23 pm

I think I'd be pretty happy with the lens approach. How do you start to categorise all the lens types or filters though.
I read one of the items A_M puts in the news thread about are people more/less rude now. In general the reply would be more rude. I also remember reading a paper some time ago that said people with depression have a more accurate idea of what is happening than others.
So my question would be, where is the baseline and how is human perception out of step with it? Aspies have a different perception, but is it closer to, or farther from reality?

Page 3 of 3 [ 42 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3

Jump to:

Autistic Philosophy Post Reply New Topic

Autistic Philosophy