Levels of Aspergers

[theminx]

There are a number of threads that you can use, all under the Forum section

https://www.aspiescentral.com/threads/post-your-art.2158/

https://www.aspiescentral.com/threads/positive-images.15955/

Although the second one refers to positive images, art is also a positive form of image. There's are others but these are the ones that I have viewed.

I will definitely take a look at your blog posts.

Thank you, Professori. I posted in the first one. I will have to think what is appropriate for the second.

Your recommendation is much appreciated. Again, thank you.

 

[radasp]

My guess? The Asperger diagnosis is like throwing (S) at a wall and seeing if it sticks. The diagnosis is NOT medical; there are no valid scientific tests. It's a socially constructed "disorder" meaning that if "someone" who claims to be an authority (usually a psychologist) says you're Asperger, you're Asperger. But all kinds of people are busy diagnosing without any real knowledge or a license to practice ( I even came across a chiropractor doing diagnosis) and it's basically fraud. So, it's no wonder that one will meet up with a vast array of individuals with an Asperger diagnosis.

 

[RecklessMick]

My guess? The Asperger diagnosis is like throwing (S) at a wall and seeing if it sticks. The diagnosis is NOT medical; there are no valid scientific tests. It's a socially constructed "disorder" meaning that if "someone" who claims to be an authority (usually a psychologist) says you're Asperger, you're Asperger. But all kinds of people are busy diagnosing without any real knowledge or a license to practice ( I even came across a chiropractor doing diagnosis) and it's basically fraud. So, it's no wonder that one will meet up with a vast array of individuals with an Asperger diagnosis.

I agree with this, it is true many people are mis diagnosed.

Autism definitely exists but the Asperger diagnosis is never definite on it's own. Real people with Asperger's would appear to have different brains than NTs, according to many studies there's also genes associated with it, so if someone really wants to know if they have Asperger's maybe they should have their brain scanned or their genetics tested.

Asperger's definitely exists but the Asperger's diagnosis can be bull(S).

Unless you're saying Autism itself doesn't exist, and on that you would be entirely wrong, but it seems like you're just talking about how a lot of times people are mis-diagnosed.

 

[theminx]

There are a number of threads that you can use, all under the Forum section

https://www.aspiescentral.com/threads/post-your-art.2158/

https://www.aspiescentral.com/threads/positive-images.15955/

Although the second one refers to positive images, art is also a positive form of image. There's are others but these are the ones that I have viewed.

I will definitely take a look at your blog posts.

I added a draft revision of my Multi*Truth Spectrum Theory here. If you were interested, Professori.

 

[Professori]

I added a draft revision of my Multi*Truth Spectrum Theory here. If you were interested, Professori.

Thanks, I will read through them - always good to look at some thought-provoking writing. Will get back to you as soon as I have read them.

 

[246819733791]

if someone really wants to know if they have Asperger's maybe they should have their brain scanned or their genetics tested.

Sorry to be petty and off-topic here, but I was under the impression that one of the reasons diagnosis is so difficult is that there is no reliable physical test, like a brain scan. That certain features of a brain correlate with autism is no guarantee that they will predict it. Of course, I'm not saying that autism does not ultimately have a physio-biological cause; I am saying that, like migraines, autism must be diagnosed based on clusters of presented symptoms.

 

[Professori]

I added a draft revision of my Multi*Truth Spectrum Theory here. If you were interested, Professori.

I see that you are indeed a thinker and critical-analyst, and I agree that the systems of 'education' today do not tolerate or encourage that type of innovative thinking. Even though we live in a society which claims that there are no absolutes, it is largely linear in its thinking and expectations.

Did you know that there is one group which holds opposites in tension very comfortably, are not troubled by paradoxes and accept the contradictions as being quite acceptable, even necessary? It is only we in the Western world who need to have all our ducks in a row in order to be satisfied and then refer to it as 'logic'. That group is the Hebrews, but you would have to read into the Talmud, the rabbinical wisdom writings in order to discover that little gem.

I appreciate your approach to holding all 'truths' in tension in your spectrum theory - it is a well thought out and argued look at calling all to pursue all eventualities. Great processing! One has to read very widely throughout life in order to process meaningfully, and certainly reach conclusions. This is why at university I studied in the areas of Psychology, Economics, Sociology, Anthropology, Languages, Fine Art, Architecture, Busness Science, etc. Unorthdox, but necessary. Later in life I have also studied Theology because it is absolutely necessary.

One comment: you have slipped in absolutist language and thinking in one area of your discussions, and this involves the 'Big Question' which philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, natural scientists, etc. have debated for centuries: is there a god? In stating that you do not believe in a god you have then closed your mind to any further debate on the issue. You may listen to, or read further debate, but that is all because you are basically stating that you will not change your mind; therefore, you may as well not listen to or consider any other opinions, and that is a contradiction.

Please do not take this to mean that I am now attempting to push you in a specific direction - I am not. All I am attemting to do is say just be careful to be truly open-minded. There are great philosophers who discuss this from all angles, even though they may take a particular standpoint. So, atheists really respect the likes of William Lane Craig who is an apologist - a really intelligent debater.

Take one of the respected philosophers: Nietzsche, a dichotomist-scientist, who wrote extensively on religion, philosophy, and science. Early in his life he abandoned faith altogether, saying, “Hence the ways of men part: if you wish to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire…” However, quid est veritas?

Then, later in life after much studying and writing, he wrote, "The essential thing in 'heaven and earth' is that there should be a long obedience in the same direction; there thereby results, and has always resulted in the long run, something which has made life worth living." In this he then effectively negated all of his previous writings. Psychologist Jung came to a similar conclusion. So, in short, one must be open to persuasion of any kind.

This is only one area of debate amongst the myriad of topics out there. However, I have too often come across people who say that they are atheists and yet have done absolutely no reading into the area at all, no studying into the line of thought, read no theological debates, Christian or otherwise. They then embarrass themselves and become aggressive. How can one reject something about which one knows absolutely nothing? That is the ultimate contradiction (I am not placing you in this category, but rather asking a leading question in general).

I ask again: Quid est veritas? The ultimate quest!

 

[theminx]

I see that you are indeed a thinker and critical-analyst, and I agree that the systems of 'education' today do not tolerate or encourage that type of innovative thinking. Even though we live in a society which claims that there are no absolutes, it is largely linear in its thinking and expectations.

Did you know that there is one group which holds opposites in tension very comfortably, are not troubled by paradoxes and accept the contradictions as being quite acceptable, even necessary? It is only we in the Western world who need to have all our ducks in a row in order to be satisfied and then refer to it as 'logic'. That group is the Hebrews, but you would have to read into the Talmud, the rabbinical wisdom writings in order to discover that little gem.

I appreciate your approach to holding all 'truths' in tension in your spectrum theory - it is a well thought out and argued look at calling all to pursue all eventualities. Great processing! One has to read very widely throughout life in order to process meaningfully, and certainly reach conclusions. This is why at university I studied in the areas of Psychology, Economics, Sociology, Anthropology, Languages, Fine Art, Architecture, Busness Science, etc. Unorthdox, but necessary. Later in life I have also studied Theology because it is absolutely necessary.

One comment: you have slipped in absolutist language and thinking in one area of your discussions, and this involves the 'Big Question' which philosophers, psychologists, sociologists, anthropologists, natural scientists, etc. have debated for centuries: is there a god? In stating that you do not believe in a god you have then closed your mind to any further debate on the issue. You may listen to, or read further debate, but that is all because you are basically stating that you will not change your mind; therefore, you may as well not listen to or consider any other opinions, and that is a contradiction.

Please do not take this to mean that I am now attempting to push you in a specific direction - I am not. All I am attemting to do is say just be careful to be truly open-minded. There are great philosophers who discuss this from all angles, even though they may take a particular standpoint. So, atheists really respect the likes of William Lane Craig who is an apologist - a really intelligent debater.

Take one of the respected philosophers: Nietzsche, a dichotomist-scientist, who wrote extensively on religion, philosophy, and science. Early in his life he abandoned faith altogether, saying, “Hence the ways of men part: if you wish to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire…” However, quid est veritas?

Then, later in life after much studying and writing, he wrote, "The essential thing in 'heaven and earth' is that there should be a long obedience in the same direction; there thereby results, and has always resulted in the long run, something which has made life worth living." In this he then effectively negated all of his previous writings. Psychologist Jung came to a similar conclusion. So, in short, one must be open to persuasion of any kind.

This is only one area of debate amongst the myriad of topics out there. However, I have too often come across people who say that they are atheists and yet have done absolutely no reading into the area at all, no studying into the line of thought, read no theological debates, Christian or otherwise. They then embarrass themselves and become aggressive. How can one reject something about which one knows absolutely nothing? That is the ultimate contradiction (I am not placing you in this category, but rather asking a leading question in general).

I ask again: Quid est veritas? The ultimate quest!

I have much to think about regarding what you have written.

I understand what you are saying about me being an absolutest in this particular vein of my thinking, in regards to my atheism. And I do agree.

It is interesting that you bring this up to me now, as I have actually been thinking much about this lately: that I cannot proclaim to have an open mind....amenable to growth and change if I profess myself to be an atheist, with little wriggle room in any other direction.

The reason I find it odd that you bring it up now...is that I'm working on what I'm either going to call Dialectical Cognitive Harmonization or Equilibration as a means to overcome Cognitive Dissonance.

My thinking is...our personal and societal biases or filters are what cause the dissonance in our brains, so...if we force ourselves to hold two opposing perspective or values in our heads and ask ourselves to argue the viability and potential validity of the opposing perspective, then it is possible to rid ourselves (or at the very least mitigate the effects) of those filters on our brains.

I've been doing this with atheism using theology (currently reading this book called Systematic Theology) these past few weeks, hence why my MultiTruth Spectrum Theory is still a draft. I actually only posted it in my blog yesterday so I could share some of the recent changes I made to it with you, and is the reason it has "(Draft Revision)" in its title.

Theology always has been difficult for me...I think because I was brought up Catholic. I remember when I was 11yrs old. I was in CCD (Confraternity of Christian Doctrin) and I told the instructor I had been reading a lot of mythology lately...and it got me to thinking: if they were wrong, who's to say we're right?

I got in trouble and kicked out of class.

This frustrated me.

I had similar instances happen several more times over the years, especially when my parents sent me to Catholic high school.

Admittedly, this made me feel bitter and resentful.

And is likely a huge filter I've difficulty seeing past and reconciling within mymyself

My college career was very meandering. I started out wanting to be a writer, then realized I was much more analytical than creative at that time, so moved into the sciences. I think I wasn't all that creative because I hadn't experienced enough of life to have any stores of creativity to dip into.

I think in patterns, so I need to map a thing to understand it...to sometimes solve it like it is a puzzle. This sometimes causes me to take much longer to understand a thing, which is likely why it took me so long to get from there...to here.

I went twice for my Masters (once for secondary education and then for organic chemistry) and quit. I've thought about going back again, cuz I am capable of excelling in formalized training settings when I force myself, but it doesn't feel...organic or authentic to me. I seem to map and learn a thing much more comprehensively if I'm allowed to do so on my own...of my own volition...in my own time...from observation, reading and experimentation...and debate.

But I do strongly believe knowledge isn't static. Mine. Or onyones'. So, I'm constantly learning and evolving.

At least, that is my hope.

Again, you've given me much to think on.

Thank you.

Also, I very much appreciate that you called me a thinker and critical-analyst I take that as high praise from one such as yourself. And appreciate your constructive feedback.

Again, thank you!

 

[Professori]

I have much to think about regarding what you have written.

I understand what you are saying about me being an absolutest in this particular vein of my thinking, in regards to my atheism. And I do agree.

It is interesting that you bring this up to me now, as I have actually been thinking much about this lately: that I cannot proclaim to have an open mind....amenable to growth and change if I profess myself to be an atheist, with little wriggle room in any other direction.

The reason I find it odd that you bring it up now...is that I'm working on what I'm either going to call Dialectical Cognitive Harmonization or Equilibration as a means to overcome Cognitive Dissonance.

My thinking is...our personal and societal biases or filters are what cause the dissonance in our brains, so...if we force ourselves to hold two opposing perspective or values in our heads and ask ourselves to argue the viability and potential validity of the opposing perspective, then it is possible to rid ourselves (or at the very least mitigate the effects) of those filters on our brains.

I've been doing this with atheism using theology (currently reading this book called Systematic Theology) these past few weeks, hence why my MultiTruth Spectrum Theory is still a draft. I actually only posted it in my blog yesterday so I could share some of the recent changes I made to it with you, and is the reason it has "(Draft Revision)" in its title.

Theology always has been difficult for me...I think because I was brought up Catholic. I remember when I was 11yrs old. I was in CCD (Confraternity of Christian Doctrin) and I told the instructor I had been reading a lot of mythology lately...and it got me to thinking: if they were wrong, who's to say we're right?

I got in trouble and kicked out of class.

This frustrated me.

I had similar instances happen several more times over the years, especially when my parents sent me to Catholic high school.

Admittedly, this made me feel bitter and resentful.

And is likely a huge filter I've difficulty seeing past and reconciling within mymyself

My college career was very meandering. I started out wanting to be a writer, then realized I was much more analytical than creative at that time, so moved into the sciences. I think I wasn't all that creative because I hadn't experienced enough of life to have any stores of creativity to dip into.

I think in patterns, so I need to map a thing to understand it...to sometimes solve it like it is a puzzle. This sometimes causes me to take much longer to understand a thing, which is likely why it took me so long to get from there...to here.

I went twice for my Masters (once for secondary education and then for organic chemistry) and quit. I've thought about going back again, cuz I do think I am capable of excelling in formalized training settings when I force myself, but it doesn't feel...organic or authentic to me. I seem to map and learn a thing much more comprehensively if I'm allowed to do so on my own...of my own volition...in my own time...from observation, reading and experimentation...and debate.

But I do strongly believe knowledge isn't static. Mine. Or onyones'. So, I'm constantly learning and evolving.

At least, that is my hope.

Again, you've given me much to think on.

Thank you.

Also, I very much appreciate that you called me a thinker and critical-analyst I take that as high praise from one such as yourself. And appreciate your constructive feedback.

Again, thank you!

Wonderful! Again, I can see that you are open and willing to consider all viewpoints which is really the ideal approach to expand and add value to your worldview.

I am really sorry to read about your experiences with Catholicism, especially since you were kicked out of class. That is truly demeaning and would surely provide grounding for a negative viewpoint. I personally have serious problems with Catholicism and think that their doctrine really diminishes the human mind and capacity to think. But that is another matter.

No matter where stand we should leave no stone unturned in our quest.

Thanks for the very interesting chat and opportunity to read through your blog posts!

 

[theminx]

I am really sorry to read about your experiences with Catholicism, especially since you were kicked out of class. That is truly demeaning and would surely provide grounding for a negative viewpoint. I personally have serious problems with Catholicism and think that their doctrine really diminishes the human mind and capacity to think. But that is another matter.

No matter where stand we should leave no stone unturned in our quest.

I completely agree about Catholicism. From a very young age, they attempted to stifle and quash my curiosity and desire for learning, especially as a female. I did well in school...academically. But that's only because I idolized my father, and went out of my way to please him, but that's because I sometimes felt he was the only person who got me. So, it was extremely important to me that I did well for him.

Mostly cuz....I've always felt...odd. Since I was a little girl. I used to tell my parents I was a halfling/changeling child, that I was part fae or part of some other alien race.

My father always understood me. He retired a few years back. My mom never really worked. I guess my father was really big on the whole gender role thing, yet he was the one who told me...verbatim mind you...when I was a about 11yrs old, "Our male dominated society is a product of biology. Education and technology are the great equalizers. You can do anything you put your mind to, little girl. Don't ever let anyone tell you differently."

He very much enjoyed that I would write him letters of my own accord after I did something wrong. I'd tell him what I learned. And what I planned to do to never make the same mistake again. Or, if I disagreed with him, I'd explain my reasoning and why I thought his methodology was flawed. He thought I was very insightful. And he'd often call me in his office to discuss what I'd written...and he'd allow me to argue or debate my case.

He enjoyed that I was an independent thinker, but even if I disagreed with him...his rules or punishments, I'd still follow them...and take my punishments in stride. He told me a wise leader...well, he actually told me what an unwise leader does...and here he quoted Karl Popper...though he paraphrased for my young mind...though I learned the true quote much later in life...goes:

"The [true] authoritarian [is problematic, as he] will in general select only those who obey, who believe, who respond to his influence. But in doing so, he is bound to select mediocrities. For he excludes those who revolt, who doubt, who dare to resist his influence. Never can an authority admit that the intellectually courageous, i.e. those who dare to defy his authority, may be the most valuable type..."

My father recognized that though I was a child with limited experience and scope, I still saw the world differently than he. And my perspective was valid...even if he disagreed with my way of thinking (which plays a huge role in my MultiTruth Spectrum Theory). And he often took what I said into consideration. And once or twice apologized for punishing me after hearing my side of the equation.

He in many ways is and was an enlightened man. And very much the reason I am as I am today.

When I was 8yrs old, my father found me with frog I'd nailed to a stump. It was still alive. And I was trying to use a bow saw to slice it open (apologies to anyone who reads this who is an animal lover, but my curiosity at that juncture outweighed my love of frogs, which is not an excuse...and part of me often hesitates sharing this aspect of my story for fear it might upset someone, but then I argue with myself that I need to own every experience that makes me who I am...and not hide from it...for fear I will be judged for it).

My father asked what I was doing. I told him I wanted to understand how a circulatory system worked. He asked why a bow saw. I said mom wouldn't let me take a knife from the kitchen, so I had to improvise.

He told me to carry on, then left me to it.

I was a little monkey. And would climb trees with a backpack full of books to get away from everyone, especially my younger sister. I would sit up there for hours and read and ponder and speculate.

My father, much like me, was a voracious reader from time in perpetuity...or since I can remember, whichever came first. But he doesn't look it. He has that: I'm gonna kick your *ss...look radiating from his pores.

But looks can be quite deceiving, as I'm sure you're already quite aware.

When I was about 8yrs old (seems a pivotal age for me), I sat next to my father in the kitchen one Sat morn. I picked up one of his books he was reading...and tried to mimic his pose and read while sipping my juice like he sipped his coffee. It took him several min to even notice I was there, and when he finally did. He was like, "Whoa, there, little girl?! Whatcha reading?"

I showed him the book with such pride beaming from my eyes, though, admittedly, I'd not understood what it was I was reading at that time.

He let out this huge bellows of a laugh. It was some gritty old school science fiction like Heinlein (whom I've actually came to love). He then explained these books were much too mature for me, but he knew exactly where to take me to fill my curiosity.

First he took me to an old book store and we sat for hours just flipping through pages, trying to find age appropriate science fiction and fantasy books.

We left the store with The Hobbit, Narnia, a Wrinkle in Time, Through the Looking Glass, etc.
This then became a weekly trip for us. We'd wake early on Sat. He'd take me to breakfast, then we'd go to old book stores or the library.

We'd come home loaded with books. My mom would be irate. She had no idea what was going to happen when we ran out of shelve space for the books.

I remember her saying, "I swear to the heavens (or whatever) if I find piles of books just lying around, they're fair game to toss. And if you get your daughter into the habit of reading while eating dinner...remember, I know where you sleep!"

Hahaha! I swear she still has nightmares about all those goddamn books! ;p

Things changed a bit when I hit puberty, but not as much as people think. I just started to like looking like a girl, which in no way negated all that came before. But people assume cuz a girl looks a certain way...

...which is infinitely frustrating.

My father and I still do bonding stuff. And I very much love that all the inappropriate stuff that often runs thru my brain, comes outta his mouth.

He has no filter! Hahaha!

Also, apologies for my lengthy responses. I do not wish to inundate you with my crazy. But I do very much appreciate that you've listened to me. Truly. You've my gratitude.

 

[Professori]

I completely agree about Catholicism. From a very young age, they attempted to stifle and quash my curiosity and desire for learning, especially as a female. I did well in school...academically. But that's only because I idolized my father, and went out of my way to please him, but that's because I sometimes felt he was the only person who got me. So, it was extremely important to me that I did well for him.

Mostly cuz....I've always felt...odd. Since I was a little girl. I used to tell my parents I was a halfling/changeling child, that I was part fae or part of some other alien race.

My father always understood me. He retired a few years back. My mom never really worked. I guess my father was really big on the whole gender role thing, yet he was the one who told me...verbatim mind you...when I was a about 11yrs old, "Our male dominated society is a product of biology. Education and technology are the great equalizers. You can do anything you put your mind to, little girl. Don't ever let anyone tell you differently."

He very much enjoyed that I would write him letters of my own accord after I did something wrong. I'd tell him what I learned. And what I planned to do to never make the same mistake again. Or, if I disagreed with him, I'd explain my reasoning and why I thought his methodology was flawed. He thought I was very insightful. And he'd often call me in his office to discuss what I'd written...and he'd allow me to argue or debate my case.

He enjoyed that I was an independent thinker, but even if I disagreed with him...his rules or punishments, I'd still follow them...and take my punishments in stride. He told me a wise leader...well, he actually told me what an unwise leader does...and here he quoted Karl Popper...though he paraphrased for my young mind...though I learned the true quote much later in life...goes:

"The [true] authoritarian [is problematic, as he] will in general select only those who obey, who believe, who respond to his influence. But in doing so, he is bound to select mediocrities. For he excludes those who revolt, who doubt, who dare to resist his influence. Never can an authority admit that the intellectually courageous, i.e. those who dare to defy his authority, may be the most valuable type..."

My father recognized that though I was a child with limited experience and scope, I still saw the world differently than he. And my perspective was valid...even if he disagreed with my way of thinking (which plays a huge role in my MultiTruth Spectrum Theory). And he often took what I said into consideration. And once or twice apologized for punishing me after hearing my side of the equation.

He in many ways is and was an enlightened man. And very much the reason I am as I am today.

When I was 8yrs old, my father found me with frog I'd nailed to a stump. It was still alive. And I was trying to use a bow saw to slice it open (apologies to anyone who reads this who is an animal lover, but my curiosity at that juncture outweighed my love of frogs, which is not an excuse...and part of me often hesitates sharing this aspect of my story for fear it might upset someone, but then I argue with myself that I need to own every experience that makes me who I am...and not hide from it...for fear I will be judged for it).

My father asked what I was doing. I told him I wanted to understand how a circulatory system worked. He asked why a bow saw. I said mom wouldn't let me take a knife from the kitchen, so I had to improvise.

He told me to carry on, then left me to it.

I was a little monkey. And would climb trees with a backpack full of books to get away from everyone, especially my younger sister. I would sit up there for hours and read and ponder and speculate.

My father, much like me, was a voracious reader from time in perpetuity...or since I can remember, whichever came first. But he doesn't look it. He has that: I'm gonna kick your *ss...look radiating from his pores.

But looks can be quite deceiving, as I'm sure you're already quite aware.

When I was about 8yrs old (seems a pivotal age for me), I sat next to my father in the kitchen one Sat morn. I picked up one of his books he was reading...and tried to mimic his pose and read while sipping my juice like he sipped his coffee. It took him several min to even notice I was there, and when he finally did. He was like, "Whoa, there, little girl?! Whatcha reading?"

I showed him the book with such pride beaming from my eyes, though, admittedly, I'd not understood what it was I was reading at that time.

He let out this huge bellows of a laugh. It was some gritty old school science fiction like Heinlein (whom I've actually came to love). He then explained these books were much too mature for me, but he knew exactly where to take me to fill my curiosity.

First he took me to an old book store and we sat for hours just flipping through pages, trying to find age appropriate science fiction and fantasy books.

We left the store with The Hobbit, Narnia, a Wrinkle in Time, Through the Looking Glass, etc.
This then became a weekly trip for us. We'd wake early on Sat. He'd take me to breakfast, then we'd go to old book stores or the library.

We'd come home loaded with books. My mom would be irate. She had no idea what was going to happen when we ran out of shelve space for the books.

I remember her saying, "I swear to the heavens (or whatever) if I find piles of books just lying around, they're fair game to toss. And if you get your daughter into the habit of reading while eating dinner...remember, I know where you sleep!"

Hahaha! I swear she still has nightmares about all those goddamn books! ;p

Things changed a bit when I hit puberty, but not as much as people think. I just started to like looking like a girl, which in no way negated all that came before. But people assume cuz a girl looks a certain way...

...which is infinitely frustrating.

My father and I still do bonding stuff. And I very much love that all the inappropriate stuff that often runs thru my brain, comes outta his mouth.

He has no filter! Hahaha!

Also, apologies for my lengthy responses. I do not wish to inundate you with my crazy. But I do very much appreciate that you've listened to me. Truly. You've my gratitude.

You are very fortunate to have had the desire to read instilled in you at an early age. There are so many who do not read at all and find books to be 'old school' - to their serious detriment. Also, you are very fortunate to have a father such as yours. Again, there are so many who had abusive homes or absent fathers and suffer a 'father wound' or 'father hunger' which causes them to hunt for affirmation from so many other sources .

It is good to gain some insight into your personal story - thanks for offering it. Remember that I am always happy to have any discussion which you may want to have about any topic. I am sure that there is an option to PM on this forum and so move away from this thread and everyone else's reading/writing space. Someone did that with me once and the discussion is then moved away from the main forum.

 

[Ylva]

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/09/autism-hidden-advantages/406180/

 

[Loomis]

I find that aspies can be as different from each other as they are from NTs. We are all unique. I initially thought I would connect with other aspies just because we shared the diagnosis but it is not true. I may understand them but this does not mean I will develop a bond with them.

 

[radasp]

Whenever I read threads like this one I despair: The DSM 5 has come under heavy criticism and will no longer be used by the NIH when considering research grants. You may as well go to a Gypsy Tarot reader for a diagnosis. One reason you all are having mismatches with other Aspergers, is that most of today's AS aren't Asperger; it's a FAD diagnosis. Those folks are probably autistic; Aspergers are NOT intellectually challenged. We develop faster than normal in intellect, but slower (or not at all) socially. Lots of parents push for an AS diagnosis because it "sounds better" They can tell their friends that their kid is a genius. Misinformation is everywhere!

For a thorough trip through Aspergers and psychology fraud: (my background is in the sciences) http://aspergerhuman.wordpress.com

 

[Ylva]

They can tell their friends that their kid is a genius. Misinformation is everywhere!

Including here.

However, there is no reason why every other person with aspergers should be like me. It's a neurotype, not a personality type.

 

[radasp]

There is no medical diagnosis for Aspergers; neither is there proof that it is "visible on brain scans" Brain scans simply cannot identify Asperger behavior. There is no genetic "proof" just a lot of suspicion - 100 genes, 65 genes? Guessing is not science.
That leaves us with a subjective psychological judgment that if someone does not conform to socially-correct behavior (as defined by psychologists) then that person is deviant. That's BS. There have been Asperger individuals all through human history: the inventors, scientists, engineers and problem solvers; artists, musicians - the U.S. is so flipping religious that anyone who is intelligent and behaves like an adult (rational, responsible and not a member of the Jesus Cult) is seen as "dangerous" It's really sad...

 

[Maelstrom]

Including here.

However, there is no reason why every other person with aspergers should be like me. It's a neurotype, not a personality type.

Ylva ,is correct there are multiple neurotype, brain sector development types, with many high low development combinations, so yes just like there are many personality types there seem to be a number of brain development issues that interweave with the more classic autisc extra brain sector bridging thing. Personally I tend to view being aspie more as the face emotion reading blindness...which is different from auti overload face reading blindness...both look the same but auti overload face reading blindness is temporary. I have a little off both so I can feel the difference, there of course are a number of other brain sector conditions besides those some good, and some quite bad...and endless degrees of combinations.

I wouldn't start the old game all Religious people are all dumb bigots, and Atheists are all smart Geniuses around me, even the legendary CERN and NASA boys are too scared to enter the battlefield against me....

Hi Ylva

 

[Catlover614]

I was not even aware of aspie meetings taking place. How do you find one? I think I'm on the bottom of the scale, if indeed there's levels. I have noticed that I am less intelligent than most on this site. I feel like a 10 year old most of the time. I failed 9th grade reading comprehension and I failed 10th grade. I did get my GED though and I also received a diploma in Biblical studies. Still, I see myself as an underachieving nobody. I don't know why, but when I study something I like, my brain goes into lock down mode and I honestly cannot take in much info at one time. I have a learning disability and I tend to take things in the wrong context and have cognitive difficulties. I am a work in progress and will not give up trying even with all of the discouragement I endure from people who don't/won't comprehend my struggles. Hats off to you all for your great accomplishments!

 

[Catlover614]

Ylva ,is correct there are multiple neurotype, brain sector development types, with many high low development combinations, so yes just like there are many personality types there seem to be a number of brain development issues that interweave with the more classic autisc extra brain sector bridging thing. Personally I tend to view being aspie more as the face emotion reading blindness...which is different from auti overload face reading blindness...both look the same but auti overload face reading blindness is temporary. I have a little off both so I can feel the difference, there of course are a number of other brain sector conditions besides those some good, and some quite bad...and endless degrees of combinations.

I wouldn't start the old game all Religious people are all dumb bigots, and Atheists are all smart Geniuses around me, even the legendary CERN and NASA boys are too scared to enter the battlefield against me....

Hi Ylva

I am Christian and bigotry is not a trait of my religion. I don't judge or criticize anyone and neither does Jesus. He is friends with sinners, of whom I am the worst sinner. I don't hate ANYONE....not homosexuals, not unbelievers, not racist at all.

 

[radasp]

What a mess: Aspergers are heavily atheist for a reason: we are concrete, logical, physical-reality science-based thinkers. That's central to the diagnosis. Magical thinking (superstition) is a childhood stage of development (look it up) that humans supposedly grow out of, but the majority don't. It has nothing to do with a particular religion, but religious practices in general. Belief in imaginary forces and powers, often conceived of in human and animal form; belief that these "beings" can enter one's mind and "spy" on thoughts, give favors for sacrifices, - obviously stand-ins for human parents.

Bigotry is something else: a social ignorance as to the humanity of "different" people. Such as, Black People are subhuman, disabled people are retarded, and atheists are evil! LOL

Dear Catlover: You may be more intelligent than you think. ASD people are often "visual thinkers and learners" and schools and society in general are ignorant of this. A visual learner can be totally lost in a verbal classroom and shut down due to overload or frustration. Look it up!