Aspies For Freedom

It all makes very good sense, Amy.

You're right Amy..

Which probably why a lot of Aspies don't get a long. It's like a room of diffrent breeds of dogs. They are all dogs fundmentally but because each is unique they have diffrent POVs on simular topic.

silky Wrote:

I've always seen myself as approaching problem solving with more logic than emotion.

For example, when deciding whether or not to have a baby, I researched the topic. Made a spreadsheet of pros and cons, projected expenses, and listed benefits vs labor involved in child rearing. I read books, attended seminars and interviewed parents. Whereas a lot of people just "feel" they want children.

yes and as an aspie you had a plan.sounds similar to how I do most things,develop a plan and execute it. sounds logical to me

I think it's got something to do with the way we think, logic and emotion aside. I don't think we think the same way normal people think... I think. Tongue

We're not Mentats. We're not like computers.

I think we're like fishermen. We just pull our thoughts out of a pool of knowledge. The things we like the most, float to the surface the most.
Well, that's two cents for you. Excuse me, I've got a paypal donation to send to AFF; Two cents. Tongue

I am in agreement with this description.

i'd say from what i've seen, we're really not that logical half the time and are prone to emotional stimuli as much (if not more) than other neurotypes, maybe this logical myth comes from the perception that aspies are good at maths/computers...ie too many people watching rain man..lol. i think that we can be very analytical at times, but this in depth analysis could be as illogical as anything in this world.x

I don't know if my mother is aspie, she certainly would deny it, but she is certainly more logical than emotional.  Here's an example of her logical approach to a situation most people would've reacted to emotionally.

Some years ago my mother was flying back to Scotland from Spain with her elderly mother, my sister and her friend, and my cousin.  My granny was very frail, and recovering from cancer.  Shortly after the plane took off my mother looked at my granny who was sitting next to her.  Granny was sitting with her head back, eyes closed, mouth open, with no signs of breathing.

So, my mother came to the conclusion that her mother had died.  She thought through the consequences of her telling the flight attendants that her mother was dead - they had just left Spain so they would probably turn the plane round and return to Spain where she would be left with a dead mother and three teenage girls.  She decided she would wait until they were nearly at Glasgow before she told anyone, then she reasoned that they would just stay in their seats while everyone else got off, and they would be able to get the dead granny off the plane, in the right country.  Once she'd decided on this course of action, she ordered a black coffee and settled back for the rest of the flight.  A few minutes after this....granny started snoring!

A false alarm, but one which my mother dealt with admirably, I thought!  A few people I've told about this were horrified.  My family all thought it was funny! Big Grin

your mother sounds calm,cool and collected , I like that, and a great story

I'm INTJ as well, or at least I was the last time I took the test! Smile

I respectfully dissent. Very few people can discuss any topic rationally for an extended period without turning the matter into a competition, it's the agressive part of our brains at work. However, the topics that have been adopted by the aspies often turn more on logic than, say, hollywood stars.

Interesting post, I am also logical but it's based on my own experiences which form an internal world, then I apply logic to that.

For instance I made errors at work, so I thought "why don't I just quit so I don't make anymore errors and others will not have to correct me." But I have to fight this thought because it seems they don't yet wish me to leave, although it's really difficult. I also tend to think about things I did during my day much, much longer than others my age.

Noises have begun bothering me alot more, it's pretty tough at times. Like a crickett outside is really something I can't fall asleep listening too (unless I'm very tired). I find my condition seems to be developing more.......... ugh

O—o… I think that happens because we are human not because of insulation or isolation or anything like that.
I guess I’m not sure how to see it, I can have my opinion for logical reasons and that makes little difference at how logical they appear to be.

Amy Wrote:

It has taken me a long time, and a lot of experience to come to this conclusion. I now think that when people say that aspies are very logical in thought and actions that it is a fallacy. Its a misinterpretation on the part of NTs, and a misguided belief from aspies themselves.

Dictionary definition of logic -
–noun
1. the science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.
2. a particular method of reasoning or argumentation: We were unable to follow his logic.
3. the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.
4. reason or sound judgment, as in utterances or actions: There wasn't much logic in her move.
5. convincing forcefulness; inexorable truth or persuasiveness: the irresistible logic of the facts.
6. Computers. logic circuit.

I think that NTs originally thought that aspies were very logical thinkers because we appeared to be showing less emotion facially. We often express less direct emotional sentiments when speaking, such as 'Isn't that cute, I'd love to have a toy like that'. Instead we may say something such as 'That looks interesting, it may be useful to me'.
The long term extension of the illusion of being logical thinkers gives rise to the MrSpock unemotional, highly logical, seemingly uncaring, unsympathetic view of us.

I feel that we actually have the same amount of emotional feelings as anyone else, however we may not realise or even know what we are feeling, and we are quicker to become over-emotional that NTs. The latter point being a reverse of popular thought.

I feel that everyone has their own internal version of what is logical, its a personal logic that guides us. As aspies we tend to rely on our personal logic a lot more than NTs do. This is probably because NTs frequently talk about their feelings to others, seek advice, discuss their plans, and get feedback. We find this harder to do, probably partly because our plans will be more unusual, its difficult to ask someone in a queue at the supermarker whether they feel sunspots are a reliable source for indicating temperature variables during the vernal equinox. Whereas an NT could easily say 'do you think its gonna rain later?'

Therefore aspie logic is much more unique, less likely to change, less likely to be focused on regular everyday realities, and more likely to be biased or centered around our special interests. We all know an aspie who compares actions in their life to operations on a computer for instance.

When debating or arguing we will often prefer to rely on our logic and expect others to do the same, rather than make emotional statements like 'You are wrong because I dont like you'. However I feel strongly that in reality we are not using any recognised form of logic at all, we are not openly looking at all the facts from all standpoints and carefully and with no bias coming to an honest conclusion. Each of us comes from the standpoint of our own personal logic (which may seem totally illogical to other people).

I have often seen an argument between two aspies where one will say 'You are not being logical' and the other one will retort with the same in exasperation. Our internal logic can help us to work out some confusing parts of our lives, and help us to make sense of a crazy world, but its not usually reliable when tested head to head in debates with other people.
Its like trying to play cards when each person has a totally different set of cards. Some might have all diamonds, some might have rune symbols on, mine would probably have pictures of strawberry shortcake dolls on.

I heard of a news story of an aspie man who got evicted for making noise in his apartment. He knew that there was soundproofing in the floor and he did make a lot of noise, he was sure that it was ok. He was warned numerous times by management about the noise he was making and would reply 'Its ok, there is soundproofing'. But his noise was overriding that. He was applying his logic of his surroundings to the situation regardless of the actual real logic of the circumstances.

This may be a large cause of conflict in our lives, I have often felt that people were not doing things logically, but there were many other factors which I was not considering as I was not aware that I was seeing tiny pieces of the picture and not the whole scene.

I hope what I have said makes sense, they are my thoughts and feelings after spending years living in an all aspie house.

ATM: Amy, it is a pleasure to speak with you again.  I am currently "away" at Autism Speaks, trying my best to influence people there. I have to admit that I do not believe that I am really getting anywhere.  In fact, for those who have seen my posts there, I welcome PM's with suggestions as to how to approach parents who love their children and want the best for them.

Of course, every so often I make the occasional trek back here.  Please let me comment on "logic."  I have often found myself socially uncomfortable around other Asperger'ites for just this reason.  I am probably an "illogical" person (as a rationalist would define logic) with beliefs that many rationalist Asperger'ites would reject.

Scientism seems to be a dominant belief among Autistic intellectuals.    I love poetry and metaphor, believing that a language that is overly literal becomes dead and boring.  I also enjoy reading philosophical and religious treatises that strict rationalists might believe are vague and unscientific.

Most highly intelligent Asperger'ites seem to be literal thinkers.  I love engaging in non-literal speaking, provided, of course, that the rules of logic are obeyed and respected.  I cannot live in an overly literal world.  I might be the opposite of the Autistic Spectrum in this sense.  When I have spoken to other Asperger'ites and Autistics in person, I often find them at a loss to understand me.  Some cannot understand why I do not take a binary "1" or "0" approach to what truth is.  I do in some respects...actually, in many respects.  However, often my form of holistic logic seems offensive to them.

I have read from widely different philosophies, and I especially gravitate toward ideas with which I do not necessary agree.  Eighteenth Century Romanticism, Buddhism, Stoicism, and political treatises of either an extreme revolutionary or an extreme reactionary nature all excite my curiosity, even as I may disagree with them.  I often find that my peers are at a loss to understand how I can view truth is complex and multifaceted.  Some seem to want me to understand the world in a more simple way, at least while conversing with them.

I am sure that there are others on the Spectrum who are similar to me in this respect.  However, it seems as though we may be in the minority.  To make a wild and unsubstantiated guess, we might comprise about 20% of the whole body of intellectually inclined Autistics.  My guess is that the other 80% (roughly estimated) have a more literalistic approach to understanding the world, favoring a binary logic.

This means that I might be distinct from BOTH the Autistic and the Neuro-typical world in many of the ways I view the world.  I may even be all alone in this respect.  As such, I may be a minority of one.  Then again, to paraphrase Thoreau, I may be a majority of one.  You may say that a "majority of one" cannot literally exist.  Yes it can, if it is my own opinion that matters to me most.

I wish you well.  Best of luck in all of your endeavors.  I hope that the economy has been good to your business.  Thank you again for providing this forum.  Many blessings.

ATM

I’m of a different mind on that matter.
I like literalism, I think that their far to vague to even understand. Basically I would prefer a language with hardly any vagueness. Nothing against a multifaceted universe but I want to know the answer to 1 specific question in either it’s complety true, complety untrue, or unknown, as you put it.
I hate wasted words.

johnH Wrote:

ATM: Thank you for your response.  I enjoyed it.  A logical paradox is about to emerge here.  You posit a binary reality of literal truth versus vague or fuzzy truth.  Now, you rightly come down on the side of literal truth.  I agree with you, because to suggest anything else would be logically contradictory.

However, agreeing with you in part, I also posit a world of complexity, in which there is a balance of logically based truths (plural "s"), each valid in their own rights as prima facie's.  This balance creates what would APPEAR as a world of relative truths, but which are really a very complex network of absolute truths.

Now, here is the paradox.  To discuss the question of the binary nature of truth, let us ask, "Is this sentence that I am writing now a statement that cannot be categorized as completely true or untrue?"  If we answer yes, then we have definitively answered "yes," contradicting the statement that the statement is absolutely true.  In which case, the statement cannot have a "fuzzy" answer.

Thus, we would have to say, "no." Yet, in that case, the statement is either true or false, but cannot be a gray area.  Well, in that case, we can only choose true or false, with nothing fuzzy.  "Unknown" would be a cop-out in this scenario, since we are grappling with a logical truth claim and not an empirical one.  Indeed, we have already seen that an answer of "true" becomes logically contradictory.  Thus, we would have to choose "false."  In other words, the above statement must be false.  That would be the only logical answer.

Yet, when we jump to a world of complexity, we notice something about the sentence.  We notice that there are quotation marks around the sentence.  When quotation marks are placed around a sentence, it is the convention to refrain from automatically assuming that a sentence is literal.  We put quotation marks in stories for just that reason.  Indeed, in some sense, even statements without quotations marks are often judged on the basis of context and not always on their own merits alone.

So, while I respect binary logic, we cannot actually judge whether the aforementioned sentence is true, false, or unknown without some kind of investigation.  I guess perhaps "unknown" would not be so off, except for the fact that we would have to come to some kind of definite conclusion at some point.  Could we?  Such an investigation would take in to account the nuances of human language, syntax, and meaning.  You would have to delve in to my mind, and comprehend the full meaning of what I mean.  In essence, you would have to get beyond the words to a full set of mental realities.  At that point, we have entered subjective reality itself.

Thus, in some sense, we would have to answer "yes" to that question, if we really to be true to modern linguistic philosophy, or to modern psychology. In every day life, we do not use binary logic. Even mathematical language, supposedly iron clad, has to grapple with some of the ambiguities suggested by Godel.  Empirical science cannot use such logic, or it would have discarded Newton the minute that Einstein proved that space-time bends.  Obviously, we cannot.

So, the sentence is true in some sense. Yet, to say that the sentence is true would lead us to the contradiction that we already reached.  If we judge its truth to be fuzzy, then in some sense we contradict the sentence.

I think that the only way out of this conundrum is to posit that prima facie's are either true or false, but not every single sentence.  There are some truth claims that are too complex to be understood simplistically.

There may be a logical hole somewhere in there.  I am sure that someone will find it.  Again, true to "fuzzy" and non-literal logic, I would argue that my point is made anyway! Wink   My point was to paint a picture of a Universe far more complex than we can simplify, but which is a joy to comprehend in its marvelous simplicity.  Hit or miss, I have established that, at least in my own mind.  And, it is my own mental enjoyment that counts to me.  Words are used most economically when wasted with enjoyment.

I concede the necessity of binary truth claims, because the Universe would be illogical without them.  However, I'll take my pragmatism as necessary mash potatoes.  However, I want a little Godel for my gravy.  I want some poetry and art for dessert.

Thank you again.  I will see you later.  Back to Autism Speaks.  I find it a chore by now, but I think that I am reaching some of the parents there.  I hope to win some over.  It would be joyous if I can!

All the best.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Marcia

BardWolf

skyblue1

Joker

splatshadow

Xanderbeanz

Marcia

skyblue1

Marcia

AgentPalpatine

lightpost

johnH

A True Monotheist

johnH

A True Monotheist