Are Aspies and NTs natural opposites?

[wyverary]

It's often said here on the forums, "If you've met one person with Aspergers, you've met one person with Aspergers." I very strongly believe the same when it comes to NT's.

 

[AsheSkyler]

Will there be ice cream too?

All yours! I can't handle the cold very well. Icecream must be all warm and thus half-melted. Why must something so good be so painful? DX

 

[99Hotdogs]

Interesting question. My boyfriend is an Aspie, and I am an ENFP. As you can imagine, we really baffle each other at times.

 

[StephF]

As was said above, there is a whole spectrum of Aspie-ness however I get very annoyed that many NT's seem to think they are themselves perfect and reckon that Aspies are defective. That is so arrogant and defective thinking.

I like the way I can abstract away emotional complexities and just zero in on the details. I don't care about "the big picture", others can worry about that. If the individual components of a project are not each perfect then the whole will fail.

I do acknowledge not all NT's are twerps but it seems like so many of the ones I have met are !!

 

[Aspergirl4hire]

I apologize for generalizing and some stereotyping in this post.
When looking at most lists of Aspie traits and NT traits it seems that these two neurological groups have complimentary traits. For example:
Aspies focus on detail, NTs see the whole picture.
Aspies excel at logic and systematizing, while NTs excel at "social logic"
There may be more examples, but at the moment the two examples above are the most obvious to me.

What do you think about this?
Thanks.

I think you did a nice job setting expectations about generalizing, and you also did nicely articulating your assumptions--and you stayed well clear of all-encompassing language (ie, you said "most lists" not "all lists").

It would appear, on "paper," that the traits are complementary, but, as Marianne Moore wrote, "we do not admire what we cannot understand."

I take light-hearted issue with the notion of "social logic"--I claim it's an oxymoron.

I don't think you owe anyone an apology for how you phrase your assumptions. It's very helpful when starting a thread to state the assumptions and it enables discussion to stay within scope.

No worries. Would love to see you post again.

cheers,
A4H

 

[Suzanne]

Getting the bigger picture; as in understanding the actual thing that's going on, rather than focusing on a minor detail. I suppose an example would be to understand a character in a book. Being able to read between the lines, and see and understand intentions. Aspies in general focus a lot more on little specifics, little details and miss what someone is about in that regard.

I remember a test I had during my assessment where they showed me an actual illustration. It had all kinds of things happening and the question was "what's going on here?". The first thing I commented on is that the perspective of the drawing was terrible (since I'm a bit of an illustrator myself) and thus critized the medium. As it turns out, what I should've pointed out was the car crash and emergency services helping the victims on the image.

When I was told what I should've seen here, I went on the debate that the assumptions of all kinds of "clues" that should give away what was going on are faulty and no one should just assume that because for example, an old man, stands in front of a dented old car, it was his... however, this is something that apparently most NT's will see and assume, or so I was told.

That's how I tend to focus on details and miss the bigger picture. And my example is quite literal at that

Thanks for that and I asked my husband's opinion, because I needed to be sure and he says I DEFINITELY do not get the bigger picture and suddenly it hit me ( lol not literally) that when I am asked a question, I cannot answer it because I complicate things!

 

[StephF]

I take light-hearted issue with the notion of "social logic"--I claim it's an oxymoron.

I love it ! I will remember that one ! Thanks AG4

 

[Wireless]

Did I type social logic?
It's a typo for gobbledygook.
You can see how similar they are in spelling...

 

[Wireless]

I think you did a nice job setting expectations about generalizing, and you also did nicely articulating your assumptions--and you stayed well clear of all-encompassing language (ie, you said "most lists" not "all lists").

It would appear, on "paper," that the traits are complementary, but, as Marianne Moore wrote, "we do not admire what we cannot understand."

I take light-hearted issue with the notion of "social logic"--I claim it's an oxymoron.

I don't think you owe anyone an apology for how you phrase your assumptions. It's very helpful when starting a thread to state the assumptions and it enables discussion to stay within scope.

No worries. Would love to see you post again.

cheers,
A4H

Thank you!

 

[Berianireth]

I'm in a PhD program and I have an unusually high score on all of the self-tests and psychological tests I've taken for Asperger's. I know a lot of NTs that don't meet the criteria for diagnosis that have Aspie traits, and I'm always stunned at how much better they are at talking to eachother than I am. So I guess I would have to say "No". But I have had funny thoughts at times when I'm sitting around with nothing to do that involve this sort of bizarro explanation for Asperger's where half the
world has strict social rules and the other half doesn't, and they're just constantly trying to catch up to eachother and not succeeding.

 

[Tigris]

Aspies and NTs are not exactly opposite. But maybe Aspies and Psychopaths who also attack NTs as well are opposites.

Autism is not the absence of empathy but rather too much of it. Psychopaths have none and they have no qualms bullying aspies and NTs.

 

[Beverly]

As a new found, I hope, friend and I were discussing last night, anyone the majority, we'll call them "normals" for now, sees as deviant from them for any reason is going to have detractors that will bully them, spread lies, rumors, misconceptions and hatred of them. We all say it's wrong, the bullies and haters are bad, etc... But, what happens next?

Next the divergent band together, that might be the LGBT people, it might be ASD people, it might be this or that minority race, it might be physically handicapped people. We band together with the intention of ending the hate and bullying, intending to make peace but in the process we end up fostering a dislike and even hatred of the normals. Really, it's the classic model of the oppressed become the oppressors and while that is rarely physical from the side of the divergent, it is still dislike, hatred, contempt, verbal bullying, no group of divergent people are truly any different than any group of normals when you look at the dynamics of the situation and the feelings and reaction within each group.

What would happen if there were no labels, no one pointed out differences as negative or positive but, simply as a different expression of being human? Just a different approach to the problem we all share - we are all human. Think about it - are we, the divergent as much a part of the problem as the normals? I think we are and, both are going to have to change before we will even begin to see a societal shift.

 

[Licorice]

I don't see Aspies and NTs as differently at all outside of communication and sensory traits. They're both prone to thinking they speak for their whole group, they both tend to see everything as us vs them with their social units, they both tend to think their group shares their traits and opinions (even when it's an assumption), and they both claim to be logical while their decisions are generally driven by emotion and they make many logical fallacies.

Asperger's communities often speak in the "royal we", assuming traits that don't apply to me at all. I think like this while the NTs I talk to think like that, I enjoy this while the NTs around me enjoy that, I'm good at this while the NTs are good at that, etc.

 

[Aspergirl4hire]

More like the communal "we," at least when I do it

 

[Licorice]

More like the communal "we," at least when I do it

Hmm.

 

[Ylva]

Asperger's communities often speak in the "royal we", assuming traits that don't apply to me at all.

They are one person referring to themselves as "we"?

I think it's supposed to mean "these things exist in our community and are part of the disability in many cases", not "these things are true for each individual in our community".