I believe that, but somewhat neuro(stereo)typically, get annoyed when people pseudonymously quote themselves as authorities.
And making such accommodations is charitable, seeing how above-average neurotypicals require none. By all means, be proud of accomplishments and adversities overcome. Just do not pretend that these can surpass those of neurotypicals.
And? Were you sought out for being an aspie? Authoritarian personality is a state of mind or attitude characterised by one's belief in absolute obedience or submission to one's own authority, as well as the administration of that belief through the oppression of one's subordinates. It usually applies to individuals who are known or viewed as having an authoritative, strict, or oppressive personality towards subordinates. -http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authoritarian_personality Why, do you feel like your are my subordinate? I am still waiting for you to connect the dots. Again, only yourself to blame. You should be wary of implying threats on this forum. Behaviour that may get you banned * Threats. - Sciforums - Rules, posting guidelines and advice to membersJust another heads up, like the one I gave you before your other thread got closed. And these are not my rules nor my authority. I just expect the social rules adhered to. And yes, I have no compunction about braving whatever response I might get, especially from someone who would wish a disability on a child. While I would never preemptively take matters into my own hands, I would relish being justified in doing so (self-defense). It is a bit ridiculous for an aspie to make accusations of "anti social". Wow. You probably do not even realize that you just completely verified exactly what I said. "Relational thinking" does not change a thing, as an advantage completely compensating for a disability would make you a neurotypical. At least you have learned to create new topics rather than take a thread on an off-topic tear. But then you are the one who brought it up, so failing to start the new topic will make this an evasion. What evidence? Even if there were, this would have nothing to do with projection. My above statements are completely factual, aside from the one I specifically said was a surmise. The only serious evidence presented was done so in response to me saying this, and I fully addressed it. Again, what supposed evidence are you talking about?
It's not charitable if the profit motive is there. Neurotypicals, some of them close personal friends, just aren't the same. They lack focus, attention to detail, and a kind of obsessiveness that can be a gift, or a curse. It is certainly a blessing to some businesses. Among them certain famous organizations that I cannot mention due to privacy concerns. And certain high tech start ups doing amazing things which I also cannot be specific about, but I'll just say that some of their products are now in orbit. They can definitely surpass NTs. And some can't. But this is about averages. We often have to counter a stereotype that we are all savants, and that isn't true either. But it is true that some autistics have skills that no NT could match, such as Temple Grandin, or the man who the character of rainman was modeled on, (who I know from personal experience is also a gifted artist). Many of us aren't skilled in any obvious way, but it is a fact in all the literature that Asperger's Syndrome is often accompanied by higher than average intelligence. Go ahead live in denial and think it's nothing but a disability you wouldn't wish on anyone. We know better.
Hmm, did you edit this with the "somewhat"? Because I was going to say that I wouldn't consider you an average neurotypical. It's not that big of a deal, though, and besides, he's somewhat interesting. Syne should cut him a little slack. Futilitist, Instead of reading Girard’s “Violence and the Sacred,” why not try Steven Pinker’s “The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined”? I like Pinker's work. Our reasoning skills have lead to our moral advances. Whether it was enhanced by the logic of the Golden Rule, or not, keep in mind that the concept itself has a history that predates the term. http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/why_is_there_peace/ http://www.jeramyt.org/papers/girard.html Dr. Wilson sees religion as the product of group selection at work and Girard agrees with him. However, group selection isn’t widely accepted by evolutionists. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Group_selection#Criticism The False Allure of Group Selection Enjoy your stay. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
You have yet to show any evidence that aspies can surpass above-average neurotypicals, so it is charitable as there is more profit motive in NTs which require absolutely no special considerations. It seems you are not too familiar with above-average NTs, as they are as increasingly focused, detail-oriented, and obsessive as they are above average. Again, it appears you are only comparing the average NT to the exceptional aspie. Where is the evidence? Your last attempt was a complete flop. It is true that savants, usually more severe on the autistic spectrum, can do some amazing things. NTs can be trained to do many of them. Where they cannot the symptoms of autism are so severe that the abilities are reduced to novelty in their usefulness to any business interest. The social inaccessibility simply makes the skill too unwieldy.
You don’t have to be autistic to have exceptional abilities. Neurotypical geniuses and prodigies do exist. However, in the right environment, if it doesn’t interfere with high levels of achievement, it shouldn’t be considered a disability. If given the chance.
Aspergers syndrome is what this thread is about not necessarily what motivates you. My question about, Bruno, follows from the first, assuming he had a mission of some kind, what motivated him? You've said the world is going to have some global crisis in the near future. You specifically made a note of Jesus, among other notable people, having a head trip and saying they could have had Aspergers syndrome. There's been a nuance that people with Aspergers are genetically superior. These notions are of more interest than say Aspergers by itself. But you've posted things of very little substance about yourself or idea, only posted links and having tangential arguments. Or, I could say something like: "I'm more interested in you than Aspergers, because Aspergers is boring." If you were going to write an essay, pick a topic, write it yourself, and don't make endless speculations.
Intelligent autistic people have a unique ability to focus that is unlikely to be matched even by intelligent NTs. This is what I have noticed. I care less about proving this to you than communicating an opinion to a larger audience, based on a lifetime of observation from a perspective most will never have. You can take it or leave it. I cited a peer reviewed study proving that Aspergers and High Functioning Autistic children performed better than the average NT child in some areas of intelligence. My goal wasn't to prove superiority in comparison to a select group of superior people, but simply to show you that Aspergers isn't entirely a disability. It's classified that way only in relation to a society that values social skills the most.
As I thought, nothing. I never said aspies were entirely disabled, so all you have shown is a pointless straw man.
It's not nothing, it's just not scientism. No, but you refuse to acknowledge their occasionally superior abilities, which is in all the literature on the subject, and was observed by Hans Asperger himself.
And Hans Asperger was also an Aspie. That is why he had the keen observational ability to see it in the children he studied. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Asperger I bolded the self quoting part for rpenner and Trooper.Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ---FutilitistPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image! EDIT: Here is a new twist on the bug problem I keep having so often. Now I can't post due to a database error! Wow! So I am posting an answer to Syne that took some time for me to compose, here, using the edit button, as I have been doing whenever the bug problem arises. This post appears out of time sequence here because of a now even more aggressive bug situation. Hopefully the bug will be fixed soon. So, you are saying that savants are special, and can do some amazing things. They are, unfortunately, more severe on the autistic spectrum, i.e. less high functioning. Savants are clearly different than high functioning autistics. Higher functioning autistics, and people with Asperger's syndrome, can clearly do better than less high functioning savants, at least in the virtual world, as you point out in your next quotation: You go on to say: So, here you point out that I am the exception to the rule that high functioning Asperger's autistics can handle internet social interactions well. If I am to be the exception to this rule, you are clearly saying that you view me as high functioning. Thanks. But then, in your very next sentence you seem to contradict yourself and say that I am not so high functioning: You seem to be a bit confused by your observations. The data is inconclusive. It doesn't fit your mental model of the situation. Perhaps you were just trying to make a joke. Unfortunately, your attempt at humor fails because it does not fit the form, or the science. But it creates opportunity. Let's summarize, shall we? 1. Low functioning true savants can do some amazing things. But they are severely handicapped socially. 2. Higher functioning autistics and Aspies often do better socially in internet discussion forums. 3. Higher functioning Futilitist fails at internet discussion forums. 4. Perhaps Futilitist is low functioning. So, true savants are low functioning. And Futilitist is also low functioning, yet he seems to have some high functioning traits. Have you even stopped to consider the possibility that Futilitist may be a savant? How else do you explain the fact that I keep winning the debate with you? ---FutilitistPlease Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I believe the record shows: 1. The topic Futilitist introduced in the OP was the correct understanding of Asperger individuals. 2. The pseudonymous self-quote was of unsupported factual claim that Asperger individuals are completely incapable of adhering to social norms of behavior and equates them with autistic individuals. 3. Therefore this quote was a claim relating to the correct understanding of Asperger individuals which rested only on authority of individual making the claim. 4. The quote author was not, in fact, an expert psychologist, medical doctor, sociologist or similar who based an opinion objectively on the observation of a large number of Asperger individuals and/or autistic individuals. 5. The quote author was, in fact, Futilitist himself, who neither here nor where first used in post 103 of "A new theory on the evolution of religion", sources the claim to some other context where was originally said. Google search is unrevealing. Thus I conclude: 6. Futilitist has invented a baseless maxim just for the purposes of discussion on this forum 7. Futilitist deceptively uses a different name for himself to self-quote, to suggest that this maxim is external opinion 8. Futilitist has no interest in demonstrating his maxim is an opinion based on objective study 9. Futilitist seeks to unfairly elevate his own instant opinion to the status of expert opinion in discussion, unfairly disadvantaging those that might have a different opinion and equally lack expert sources Happy?
Yes, as opposed to biased and unsupported belief. And thanks for demonstrating your attention bias, as you already responded to my post that did acknowledge just that:
I suppose Futilitist is the exception to that rule, as he does not seem to be handling internet social interactions well either. Perhaps the not so high-functioning autistic has a general problem with understanding explicit social rules, like those of most forums.
I'm going to suggest that we at least give him a chance. So far, he seems more mild and more reasonable than most of the so-called neurotypicals. Well, if you are referring to me, I would be a lot happier; if you guys would tell me what you think Lasand is trying to get at with his parallelogram model in relation to Snell’s law.
Considering you just demonstrated a similar violation of the forum guidelines (cross-posting), it is little wonder that you would sympathize.
